Friday, August 15, 2025

King Arioch may have governed Elymaïs (Elam) from Ecbatana

by Damien F. Mackey “He was joined by all the people of the hill country and all those who lived along the Euphrates and the Tigris and the Hydaspes and in the plain where Arioch ruled the Elymeans”. Judith 1:6 In the process of re-identifying Ecbatana and Rages, now in a Cilician context, with Ecbatana as Adana (Abdadana?), and, more tentatively, with Rages as Karatepe: Ecbatana and Rages in Media (1) Ecbatana and Rages in Media it slowly dawned on me that the ruler of Adana (Ecbatana) during the neo-Assyrian period was one Wariku/Awariku, which is Arioch. https://www.bibleplaces.com/karatepe/?srsltid=AfmBOoqbrVR5uWGJa_Jon1b8YAI1QG0WGM4NHJRU9bQpT5TA7F3_AEiT “Karatepe is situated in the foothills of the Taurus Mountains, on the west bank of the Ceyhan River in the northeast corner of the Cilician Plain. It is a single-period, hilltop fortress that was built by a local ruler named Azatiwata at the end of the 8th century BC. He was a dependent of Wariku/Awariku, king of Que, whose capital was at Adana”. As explained in my article: Identifying King Arioch who ruled Elam (3) Identifying King Arioch who ruled Elam this King Arioch of Judith 1:6 was the same - now seemingly ubiquitous - person as Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, who went on to govern Elymaïs (Elam): …. Commenting on this text in my postgraduate university thesis (2007), I double-identified the otherwise unknown “Arioch, king of the Elymeans”, as follows (Volume Two, pp. 46-47): Verses 1:6: “Arioch, king of the Elymeans” In [Book of Judith] 1:6, which gives a description of the geographical locations from which Arphaxad’s allies came, we learn that some of these had hailed from the region of the “Hydaspes, and, on the plain, Arioch, king of the Elymeans”. I disagree with Charles that: “The name Arioch is borrowed from Gen. xiv. i, in accordance with the author’s love of archaism”. This piece of information, I am going to argue here, is actually a later gloss to the original text. And I hope to give a specific identification to this king, since, according to Leahy: “The identity of Arioch (Vg Erioch) has not been established …”. What I am going to propose is that Arioch was not actually one of those who had rallied to the cause of Arphaxad in Year 12 of Nebuchadnezzar, as a superficial reading of [Book of Judith] though might suggest, but that this was a later addition to the text for the purpose of making more precise for the reader the geographical region from whence came Arphaxad’s allies, specifically the Elamite troops. In other words, this was the very same region as that which Arioch had ruled; though at a later time, as I am going to explain. But commentators express puzzlement about him. Who was this Arioch? And if he were such an unknown, then what was the value of this gloss for the early readers? Arioch, I believe, was the very Achior who figures so prominently in the story of Judith. He was also the legendary Ahikar, a most famous character as we read in Chapter 7. Therefore he was entirely familiar to the Jews, who would have known that he had eventually governed the Assyrian province of Elam. I shall tell about this in a moment. Some later editor/translator presumably, apparently failing to realise that the person named in this gloss was the very same as the Achior who figures so prominently throughout the main story of [Book of Judith], has confused matters by calling him by the different name of Arioch. He should have written: “Achior ruled the Elymeans”. [Book of Tobit] tells us more. Some time after the destruction of Sennacherib’s armies, he who had been Sennacherib’s Rabshakeh was appointed governor (or ‘king’) of Elymaïs (Elam) (cf. 1:18, 21: 2:10). This was Tobit’s very nephew, Ahikar/Achior. But the latter ruled Elam, not in Nebuchadnezzar’s Year 12, or at about the time when he himself was a high officer in the Assyrian army, but (approximately a decade) later, during the reign of Ashurbanipal - as previously determined - when the king of Assyria sent him to Elam. From there it is an easy matter to make this comparison: “Achior ... Elymeans” [Judith]; “Ahikar (var. Achior) ... Elymaïs” [Tobit]. [End of quote] Much confusion has arisen also from the fact that Achior in the Book of Judith is called “the leader [king] of all the Ammonites” (5:5), when this should actually have read as the king of the Elamites. Now, since Ahikar went to govern Elam during the reign of Esarhaddon - who is Ashurbanipal (as above), who is Nebuchednezzar - then there may be a chance that this great man emerges as a high official in, say, the Book of Daniel. I have, indeed, identified Arioch there with, well, Arioch, of Daniel 2:14-15; 24-25: Did Daniel meet Ahikar? (5) Did Daniel meet Ahikar? An important note: Anyone engaging in a serious study of Elam and its history, will now need to (my opinion) take well into account Royce (Richard) Erickson’s article, that has so stunningly re-located the ancient land of Elam (Elymaïs): A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (2) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY | Royce Erickson - Academia.edu So, according to the above, Arioch, who ruled Elam, was also Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, and was the Achior of the Book of Judith. And Esarhaddon was also Ashurbanipal and Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’. This will give us a better scope for filling out King Arioch. It needs to be noted that governors of a region for Assyria - such as Arioch was of Elam - were regarded as “kings”. Thus the boastful Sennacherib declares (Isaiah 10:8): ‘Are not my commanders all kings?’ The Historical Arioch The Vizier (Ummânu) With what I think is a necessary merging of the C12th BC king of Babylon, Nebuchednezzar so-called I, with the potent king of neo-Assyria, Esarhaddon (or Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’), we encounter 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 following taken from J. Brinkman’s A Political History of Post-Kassite Babylonia. 1158-722 B.C. Roma (Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 1968, pp. 114-115]: … during these years in Babylonia a notable literary revival took place …. It is likely that this burst of creative activity sprang from the desire to glorify fittingly the spectacular achievements of Nebuchednezzar I and to enshrine his memorable deeds in lasting words. These same deeds were also to provide inspiration for later poets who sang the glories of the era …. The scribes of Nebuchednezzar’s day, reasonably competent in both Akkadian and Sumerian…, produced works of an astonishing vigor, even though these may have lacked the polish of a more sophisticated society. 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.)…. To which Brinkman adds the footnote [n. 641]: “Note … that Esagil-kini-ubba served as ummânu also under Adad-apla-iddina and, therefore, his career extended over at least thirty-five years”. So perhaps we can consider that our vizier was, for a time, shared by both Assyria and Babylon. Those seeking the historical Ahikar tend to come up with one Aba-enlil-dari, this description of him taken from: http://www.aakkl.helsinki.fi/melammu/database/gen_html/a0000639.php: 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. Seleucid Babylonia is, of course, much later removed in time from our sources for Ahikar. And, as famous as may have been the scribe Esagil-kini-ubba – whether or not he were also Ahikar – even better known is this Ahikar (at least by that name), a character of both legend and of (as I believe) real history. Regarding Ahikar’s tremendous popularity even down through the centuries, we read [The Jerome Biblical Commentary, New Jersey (Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), 28:28]: 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 at the beginning of the 20th cent. 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 Old Testament itself. Whilst Ahikar’s fame has spread far and wide, the original Ahikar, whom I am trying to uncover in this article, has been elusive for some. Thus J. Greenfield has written: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/chapter.jsf?bid=CBO9780511520662&cid=CBO9780511520662A012 The figure of Ahiqar has remained a source of interest to scholars in a variety of fields. The search for the real Ahiqar, the acclaimed wise scribe who served as chief counsellor to Sennacherib and Esarhaddon, was a scholarly preoccupation for many years. He had a sort of independent existence since he was known from a series of texts – the earliest being the Aramaic text from Elephantine, followed by the book of Tobit, known from the Apocrypha, and the later Syriac, Armenian and Arabic texts of Ahiqar. An actual royal counsellor and high court official who had been removed from his position and later returned to it remains unknown. E. Reiner found the theme of the ‘disgrace and rehabilitation of a minister’ combined with that of the ‘ungrateful nephew’ in the ‘Bilingual Proverbs’, and saw this as a sort of parallel to the Ahiqar story. She also emphasized that in Mesopotamia the ummânu was not only a learned man or craftsman but was also a high official. At the time that Reiner noted the existence of this theme in Babylonian wisdom literature, Ahiqar achieved a degree of reality with the discovery in Uruk, in the excavations of winter 1959/60, of a Late Babylonian tablet (W20030,7) dated to the 147th year of the Seleucid era (= 165 BCE). This tablet contains a list of antediluvian kings and their sages (apkallû) and postdiluvian kings and their scholars (ummânu). The postdiluvian kings run from Gilgamesh to Esarhaddon. …. Merging Judith’s ‘Arioch’ with Daniel’s ‘Arioch’ Arioch in Daniel Arioch is met in Daniel 2, in the highly dramatic context of king Nebuchednezzar’s Dream, in which Arioch is a high official serving the king. The erratic king has firmly determined to get rid of all of his wise men (2:13): “So the decree was issued to put the wise men to death, and men were sent to look for Daniel and his friends to put them to death”. And the king has entrusted the task to this Arioch, variously entitled “marshal”; “provost-marshal”; “captain of the king’s guard”; “chief of the king’s executioners” (2:14): “When Arioch, the commander of the king’s guard, had gone out to put to death the wise men of Babylon, Daniel spoke to him with wisdom and tact”. This is the customary way that the wise and prudent Daniel will operate. Daniel 2 continues (v. 15): “[Daniel] asked the king’s officer [Arioch], ‘Why did the king issue such a harsh decree?’ Arioch then explained the matter to Daniel”. Our young Daniel does not lack a certain degree of “chutzpah”, firstly boldly approaching the king’s high official (the fact that Arioch does not arrest Daniel on the spot may be testimony to both the young man’s presence and also Arioch’s favouring the Jews since the Judith incident), and then (even though he was now aware of the dire decree) marching off to confront the terrible king (v. 16): “At this, Daniel went in to the king and asked for time, so that he might interpret the dream for him”. Later, Daniel, having had revealed to him the details and interpretation of the king’s Dream, will re-acquaint himself with Arioch (v. 24): “Then Daniel went to Arioch, whom the king had appointed to execute the wise men of Babylon, and said to him, ‘Do not execute the wise men of Babylon. Take me to the king, and I will interpret his dream for him’.” Naturally, Arioch was quick to respond - no doubt to appease the enraged king, but perhaps also for the sake of Daniel and the wise men (v. 25): “Arioch took Daniel to the king at once and said, ‘I have found a man among the exiles from Judah who can tell the king what his dream means’.” The famous vizier of the Assyrian empire, Ahikar, will later be re-presented most unrealistically as a great sage and polymath, and he will even be reproduced as a handful of sages of encyclopaedic knowledge of the so-called Golden Age of Islam: Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism (3) Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Historically in Elam We should also be able to find a trace of Arioch as ruler of Elam for the Assyrians. Although we appear to have little to go on, there was a somewhat obscure ‘king’ of Elam right at the appropriate time (in my revised setting), the reign of Esarhaddon/ the early reign of Ashurbanipal. And he had the appropriate name, Urtak (var. Urtaki), which - if we simply substitute the t for an i - renders for us, Uriak (Arioch). Similarly, the Greek text of Tobit has taken Tobit’s Hebrew name, Obadiah (עֹבַדְיָה), and has replaced the first letter, ‘ayin (עֹ), with a tau (τ), Τωβίτ. {Obadiah is, in fact, the same as the Arabic name, Abdullah. Most interesting that Mohammed’s supposed parents, Abdullah and Amna, have the same names, respectively, as Tobit and his wife, Anna. The Nineveh connection, so fitting in the case of Tobit, becomes a complete anachronism with its re-emergence in association with Mohammed} D. T. Potts has provided this brief account of the obscure Urtak, one-time ruler of Elam (I do not necessarily accept the BC dates given here): https://e-l.unifi.it/pluginfile.php/664124/mod_resource/content/2/Testi%20in%20pdf/Potts%20DT%201999%20The%20Archaeology%20of%20Elam%209780521563581.pdf Cambridge world archaeology THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF ELAM FORMATION AND TRANSFORMATION OF AN ANCIENT IRANIAN STATE (2016) Pp. 275-276 …. The Babylonian Chronicle relates that Humban-haltash II ‘died in his palace without becoming ill’ (iv 11–12) and was succeeded by his brother Urtak (thus contra Dietrich 1970: 37, the letter ABL 839, which speaks about a king of Elam who suffered a stroke, cannot refer to Humban-haltash II; see Brinkman 1978: 308, n. 27), whose Elamite name was probably Urtagu (Zadok 1976a: 63). This occurred in the sixth year of Esarhaddon’s reign and was soon followed by a treaty between the Assyrian and Elamite kings (Borger 1956: 19) involving the return of some plundered cult statues, for in Esarhaddon’s seventh year, according to the Babylonian Chronicle, ‘Ishtar of Agade and the gods of Agade left Elam and entered Agade . . . ’ (iv 17–18; Brinkman 1990: 88; 1991: 44). This must have taken place c. 674 BC (Gerardi 1987: 12–13). Urtak is not attested in original Elamite inscriptions. He was still in power when Esarhaddon died in 669 BC and in the early years of the reign of his son and successor, Assurbanipal, grain was sent to Elam to relieve a famine which, according to Assurbanipal (ABL 295), was so bad that ‘there wasn’t even a dog to eat’ (restoration acc. to Malbran-Labat 1982: 250). Furthermore, Elamite refugees were allowed to settle in Assyria until such time as the harvest improved in Elam (Piepkorn 1933: 54). Assurbanipal was explicit in justifying his gesture of aid as a by-product of Urtak’s treaty with his father Esarhaddon (Nassouhi 1924–5: 103). But in 664 BC Urtak attacked Babylonia (for the date see Gerardi 1987: 129), apparently at the instigation of an antiAssyrian trio including Bel-iqisha, chief of the Gambulu tribe, Nabu-shum-eresh, governor of Nippur; and Marduk-shum-ibni, an Elamite official in Urtak’s administration. After receiving news of the Elamite invasion and checking it by sending his own messenger to Babylonia, Assurbanipal says, ‘In my eighth campaign, I marched against Urtak, king of Elam, who did not heed the treaty of (my) father, my sire, who did not guard the friendship’ (Gerardi 1987: 122). Assurbanipal’s account of the events which followed is very brief, noting only that the forces of Urtak retreated from their position near Babylon, and were defeated near the border of Elam. Later, Urtak himself died and according to Edition B of Assurbanipal’s annals, ‘Assur . . . , (and) Ishtar . . . , his royal dynasty they removed. The dominion of the land they gave to another; afterwards TeUmman, image of a gallû demon, sat on the throne of Urtak’ (Gerardi 1987: 133), whereupon the remaining members of both Urtak’s family and those of his predecessor, Humban-haltash II, fled to Assyria (Gerardi 1987: 123–4; Brinkman 1991: 52). If this is the same event referred to in the Shamash-shum-ukin Chronicle, according to which ‘the Elamite prince fled [to] Assyria’ on the 12th of Tammuz in the fourth year of Shamash-shum-ukin’s regency over Babylonia, then it can be placed around June-July 664 BC (Millard 1964: 19; Gerardi 1987: 128). ….

Thursday, August 14, 2025

Ecbatana and Rages in Media

Part One: Clearing away the various misconceptions by Damien F. Mackey Whereas the journey from Tobit’s Ecbatana to Rages normally took “two full days”, the almost 200-mile journey from the conventional Median Ecbatana to Rhages would have taken significantly longer. In fact it took the army of Alexander the Great 11 days at full gallop to march from the one to the other. Rightly then does Jan Simons observe (according to a conventional context) that the journey referred to in the Book of Tobit “would be a forced ‘journey of two days’ even for an express messenger”. Introduction According to critics of the Book of Tobit, the author(s) of the book had a very poor knowledge of both history and geography. However, the Book of Tobit is an inspired book of the Bible, at least from a Catholic point of view, and it has the capacity to confound the critics and the conventional context to which they adhere. Far from the author(s) of the Book of Tobit having been historically ignorant - in this case, with regard to the kingdom of Assyria - we find on closer examination that: [The] Book of Tobit corrects the textbook history (5) Book of Tobit corrects the textbook history Read also my related article: Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings (5) Book of Tobit and the Neo-Assyrian Kings And, far from the author(s) of the Book of Tobit having been geographically ignorant - in this case, with regard to the location of the land of Media - we find on closer examination that it was we who have been abysmally ignorant on this score: Search for the Median empire (3) Search for the Median empire The travelling party in the Book of Tobit was always heading in the right direction: that is, westwards, from: (i) Nineveh (possibly meaning Calah here); to (ii) the Tigris River; to (iii) Charan (Haran/Harran); to (iv) Media (in Anatolia), in which country lay (v) Ecbatana; and (vi) Rages. I had been critical in articles such as: [The] Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge (5) Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge of exegetes such as Fr. D. Dumm, who had shown scant respect for the Book of Tobit -I having expected a Catholic priest, at least, to seek to defend, rather than to ridicule, a biblical text: … The Jerusalem Bible says that “the geography is inexact”, and … Fr. D. Dumm (article, “Tobit”) in The Jerome Biblical Commentary, exclaims that: “[The angel] Raphael knows the journey of life far better than the route to Media!” Unfortunately, though, Fr. Dumm just leaves it at that, without being willing, or able, to defend the accuracy of the Bible with a proper explanation of what is happening here. But, as I confessed in my “Geography of … Tobit” article (above), I, too, was confounded - even though I was actually trying to ‘save’ the geography of the book. ‘Go West, young man’ I had it half right, having the travelling party heading westwards, unlike the critics’ eastwards, and correctly (so I think) identifying 3 of the 6 locations: Nineveh = Nineveh (Calah?) River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran But I, as well, had taken for granted the conventional location of Media, Ecbatana and Rages (in the east), and so felt myself forced to seek for alternatives - wrong ones. Thus: Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus Even after Royce (Richard) Erickson had (in 2020) saved the geographical situation by re-locating Media to Anatolia (see above articles), I had still persisted with these last 3, faulty identifications. * * * * * The sad fact is that we, in our fallen humanity, can often be groping in the dark and in need of divine enlightenment from One who knows, when, often, we don’t. This situation was recognised by John the Baptist, who proclaimed (John 3:30-31): ‘He must increase, but I must decrease. He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all’. Part Two: A possible location for Tobit’s Ecbatana ‘Yes’, he replied, ‘I have been there many times; I am acquainted with it and know all the roads. I have often traveled to Media, and would stay with our kinsman Gabael who lives in Rages of Media. It is a journey of two days from Ecbatana to Rages; for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’. Tobit 5:6 In terms of the name, Royce (Richard) Erickson appears to have chosen very well for his identification of Ecbatana in Media, opting for Abadaniye (see his Figure 1 below). In his brilliant (2020) article: A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (3) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY | Royce Erickson - Academia.edu Royce Erickson wrote on this: …. Introduction – A Geographic Anomaly Herodotus attempted to describe the origins of the Median and Persian nations in the 8th and 7th centuries BC while both were still intermittently subject to Assyrian domination. He described how a man named Deioces became king, unified the Medes and founded Agbatana, their first capital city: “Thus settled upon the throne, he (Deioces) further required them to build a single great city, and, disregarding the petty towns in which they had formerly dwelt, make the new capital the object of their chief attention. The Medes were again obedient, and built the city now called Agbatana (Ecbatana), the walls of which are of great size and strength, rising in circles one within the other. The plan of the place is that each of the walls should out-top the one beyond it by the battlements. The nature of the ground, which is a gentle hill, favours this arrangement in some degree, but it was mainly effected by art. The number of the circles is seven, the royal palace and the treasuries standing within the last. The circuit of the outer wall is very nearly the same with that of Athens.” (Herodotus …. Agbatana (variant version Ecbatana) no longer exists. Its ruins and location have never been positively identified. Modern scholars believe they are on a tell near Hamadan, Iran, based on the similarity of names and assumptions about the location of ancient Media. There is a small town in central Tukey north of Konya called Abadaniye, very similar phonetically to Agbatana. A little more than 100 years ago its Armenian name was Egdavama. Next to it lies a barren, gentle hill with a circumference of about 6 miles, very much like the circuit wall of classical Athens, 5.25 miles. its gentle slope would favor the arrangement of seven concentric walls rising one above the other, just as Herodotus describes the walls of Agbatana. According to Greek tradition, other Median major cities were Laodicea, Rhages ,and Apamea, all three not far from Ecbatana. These are their later classical Greek names; their original Median names are unknown. Modern scholars tentatively locate these sites near Tehran, based on the assumption that Agbatana was in Iran, but with admittedly very sparse historical or archaeological support. Strangely enough in south central Turkey very near modern Abadaniye described above, lie the modern towns of Dinar and Ladek, previously named Apamea and Laodicea by the Greeks. Thus there is strong circumstantial evidence that the core of the ancient Median Empire around 700 BC was not in Iran, but in central Turkish Anatolia, over 600 miles to the West. This could be written off as an absurd concept supported by astounding coincidence, so allow me add a few more facts to strengthen the case. Early Persians were closely intertwined with the Medes geographically and historically. Originally Median vassals, the Persians later ousted the Median king Astyages by means of a coup d’etat aided by the defection of most of the Median army, and established the Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great, incorporating the entire Median Empire. The original capital of the Persian Empire was founded by Cyrus II on the site of his victory over Astyages, known to the ancients as Pasargadae. Until today its location remains unknown, but is assumed by experts to be somewhere in southwest Iran, based once again on historical deduction without strong material archaeological support, despite numerous attempts to find any. Once again, we find in central Anatolia today two towns with the modern Turkish names of Pazarkaye and Khorasi not far from Abadaniye. I propose that Pazarkaye is the modern site of ancient Persian Pasargadae, and Khorasi (pronounced Khorashi) is on the site of a proposed Persian town named after either Cyrus I or Cyrus II, Persian kings whose names were pronounced “Kurush.” Finally, detailed Neo-Assyrian military campaign records mention several other towns that they specifically connect with Persia and Media. These towns are supposed by modern scholars to be located somewhere in Iran, where they cannot be found. Their Assyrian names are Amadi, Urak, Allabria, and Bustus. The first two are associated by the Persians with Media and the second two with Persia. The names of all four of these towns are very closely matched by four modern sites in Turkish Anatolia, very close to the proposed Median and Persian town sites already discussed. …. Assyrian Name Variants Modern Turkish Name Associated With Matching Rationale Amadi Kar-Amadazi, Karamadazi Çubuklu, Konya Media Kar-Amadazi is the variant Assyrian name of Amadi. Recent previous name of Turkish Cubuklu was Karamadazi Bit-Matti Matiana Goreme, Nevsehir Media Recent previous historical name of Turkish Goreme was Matiana. Located close to Abadaniye (Agbatana) and Ladek (Laodiceia) Allabria Alabag, Konya Persia Name very similar to Turkish Alabag (-ag is a common Turkish word ending). Location in close proximity to Pazarkaya (Pasargadae) and Khorasi (Khurush). Bustus Bushtu, Push, Pusutu Pusat, Konya Persia Clear name similarity with Turkish Pusat, located close to Pazarkaya and Khorasi Table 1 - Cities with Persian and Median Names in Anatolia …. [End of quote] My problem, though, with Royce’s choice of Abadaniye, north of Konya - now that I am trying to take more seriously than hitherto the Book of Tobit’s geographical indicators - is that it could not really enable for Charan (Haran) to be, as according to Tobit 10:13: “… in the midway to Ninive …”. Though, admittedly, his Abadaniye is far better situated in this regard than was my own poor choice of Bashan (Batanaea) for Ecbatana. And I am now fully realising just how inappropriate my choice was. For Bashan, unlike the Ecbatana of the Book of Tobit, was a land, not a city. Nor was Ecbatana a plain, but lay ‘in the middle of the plain’. This is how the angel Raphael will describe the geography and topography of Median Ecbatana and Rages (Tobit 5:6): ‘Yes’, he replied, ‘I have been there many times; I am acquainted with it and know all the roads. I have often traveled to Media, and would stay with our kinsman Gabael who lives in Rages of Media. It is a journey of two days from Ecbatana to Rages; for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’. Adana An important city, with an Ecbatana-like name, and which does, indeed, lie in the middle of a plain, is “Adana …. Situated in the middle of the Cukurova Plain (Cilician Plain) ….”: https://www.allaboutturkey.com/adana.html And a glance at the next map will show that Adana (given there as Adanya) - rather than Royce Erickson’s Abadaniye - appears to fit rather well with regard to Charan’s (Haran’s) being “… in the midway to Ninive …”. (Map: Adanya … Harrān … Ninive) With Konya some 345 km to the NW of Adana, hence going further away from Haran, then Abadaniye to Konya’s north would be located too far westwards, I should think, for it to fit the geography of the Book of Tobit concerning its location of Ecbatana. Adana may possibly be the Abdadana of neo-Assyrian (the era of Tobit and Tobias) inscriptions: https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/bdadana-region-in-western-media/ “In 716 B.C. Sargon II during his eighth campaign received tribute from Bīt-Abdadāni, Namar, Sangibutu, and the country of the “mighty Medes” (see F. Thureau-Dangin, Une relation de la huitième campagne de Sargon, Paris, 1973, line 39)”. Adana was a city of great administrative importance and it was centrally located: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adana Adana … is a large city in southern Turkey. The city is situated on the Seyhan River, 35 km (22 mi) inland from the northeastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. It is the administrative seat of the Adana province, and has a population of 1,816,750 (Seyhan, Yuregir, Cukurova, Saricam) … making it the largest city in the Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Adana lies in the heart of Cilicia, which some say, was once one of the most important regions of the classical world. …. Home to six million people, Cilicia is an important agricultural area, owing to the large fertile plain of Çukurova. Adana is a centre for regional trade, healthcare, and public and private services. Agriculture and logistics are important parts of the economy. The city is connected to Tarsus and Mersin by TCDD train. The closest public airport is Çukurova International Airport. Etymology The name Adana (Turkish pronunciation: [aˈda.na] …; Armenian: Ադանա; Greek: Άδανα) has been used for over four millennia. …. …. History Hittite warrior in Adana Archaeological Museum Bronze Age Inhabited by Luwians and Hurrians, Kizzuwatna had an autonomous governance under Hittite protection, but they had a brief period of independence from the 1500s to 1420s BC. [sic] According to the Hittite inscription of Kava, found in Hattusa (Boğazkale), Kizzuwatna was ruling Adana, under the protection of the Hittites, by 1335 BC. With the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1191–1189 BC, native Denyen sea peoples took control of Adana and the plain until around 900 BC. …. Iron Age Then Neo-Hittite states were founded in the region with the Quwê state centred on Adana. Quwê and other states were protected by the Neo-Assyrian Empire, though they had periods of independence too. After the Greek migration into Cilicia in the 8th century BC, the region was unified under the rule of the Mopsos dynasty … and Adana was established as the capital. …. The Assyrians took control of the regions several times before their collapse in 612 BC. …. [End of quote] Of potential significance for Adana’s (as Ecbatana) connecting to Rages in the mountains (‘… for it lies in a mountainous area, while Ecbatana is in the middle of the plain’), is this piece of information from Britannica (emphasis added): https://www.britannica.com/place/Adana-Turkey Adana, city, south-central Turkey. It is situated in the plain of Cilicia, on the Seyhan River (the ancient Sarus River). An agricultural and industrial centre and the country’s fourth largest city, it probably overlies a Hittite settlement that dates from approximately 1400 bce [sic], and its history has been profoundly influenced by its location at the foot of the Taurus Mountain passes leading to the Syrian plains. …. Part Three: A possible location for Tobit’s Rages For what need we now to be looking in relation to Tobit’s Rages? Well, if Adana is Tobit’s Ecbatana, then Rages must needs be - as according to Tobit 5:6 - two days’ distance from Adana in the plain, and Rages must be situated in the (presumably Taurus) mountains. Moreover, according to the Book of Tobit, two camels were employed on the trip (9:5): “So Raphael with the four servants and two camels went to Rages in Media and stayed with Gabael”. That potential mode of transport likely needs to be taken into account with regard to the time needed to cover the distance. I am no expert on camels - had a nervous ride on one in 1990 to the Giza pyramids. But I would estimate that Rages ought not to be much in excess of, say, 100 km from Ecbatana (Adana). Ancient conditions, topography, tracks, etc., would also need to be factored in. Perhaps some generous, informed reader will help out here. Anyway, after much consideration, I have picked out Karatepe as the best candidate for ancient Rages that I can come up with at this stage. And this, despite none of its known names having any likeness to Rages. Karatepe, like Rages, was in the mountains: https://www.bibleplaces.com/karatepe/?srsltid=AfmBOoqbrVR5uWGJa_Jon1b8YAI1QG0WGM4NHJRU9bQpT5TA7F3_AEiT “Karatepe is situated in the foothills of the Taurus Mountains, on the west bank of the Ceyhan River in the northeast corner of the Cilician Plain” It was prominent in the neo-Assyrian (Tobit’s) century: “It is a single-period, hilltop fortress that was built by a local ruler named Azatiwata at the end of the 8th century BC”. Karatepe is about 115 km distance from Adana (by car). 1 hr 26 min (115.4 km) via O-52/E90 The distance may be stretching those two camels! And it was under the rule of Adana (Ecbatana): “… a local ruler named Azatiwata … was a dependent of Wariku/Awariku, king of Que, whose capital was at Adana”. 15th August, 2025

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Geography of the Book of Tobit presents a fascinating challenge

by Damien F. Mackey Introduction Upon finishing my most recent article: Search for the Median empire (8) Search for the Median empire with its radical re-location of the land of Media (based on Royce Erickson), I thought to reconsider my geography of the Book of Tobit and its troublesome “Media”, as discussed in a now old article, “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”. Having done that, I came to realise that I must now put aside the latter article and attempt to create a new and (hopefully) more accurate one. This one. Here, firstly, I shall recall what I wrote at the beginning of “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”, in which the geographical problem is plainly set out, followed by my first attempt at a solution. After that, I can proceed with a new, and hopefully more satisfactory, account of the geography of the Book of Tobit. The Problem In my “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit” article, I began: To a good friend who wrote this about the geography of the Book of Tobit: Tobias and the Tigris. Several possibilities exist here. It is not unknown for several streams to bear the same name, nor is it impossible that the swiftest road into Media was a highway which was accessed by Tobias traveling to the real Tigris River to connect with this route. …. I would reply: What I have often argued with early Genesis, especially the Six Days and the Flood, is that a ‘surface’ reading of a biblical text may sometimes lead one to a conclusion that is far from what the original scribe(s) intended, and often far also from common sense. Such I believe to be the case, too, with standard versions of the Book of Tobit with regard to its geography. If we would believe the text as it currently stands, the angel Raphael was leading young Tobias (my prophet Job) a merry dance inasmuch as, with a starting point at Assyrian Nineveh, and with the aim of arriving at Rages near Ecbatana in Media – Ecbatana being some 185 miles east of Nineveh – the angel brings Tobias in the evening to the river Tigris, directly west of Nineveh. No wonder then that, on this basis, The Jerusalem Bible says that “the geography is inexact”, and that Fr. D. Dumm (article, “Tobit”) in The Jerome Biblical Commentary, exclaims that: “[The angel] Raphael knows the journey of life far better than the route to Media!” Unfortunately, though, Fr. Dumm just leaves it at that, without being willing, or able, to defend the accuracy of the Bible with a proper explanation of what is happening here. My previous solution But we need to go to other versions of the Book of Tobit to find the solution. [See above map for the standard locations of Nineveh, Tigris, Medes, Ecbatana] There is no geographical support in the Book of Tobit for an eastwards journey, from Nineveh to the classical Media (Ecbatana and Rhages): For one, the River Tigris is west of Nineveh; And, whilst the Median Rhages is in the plain, with Ecbatana being in the mountains, the Book of Tobit has Ecbatana in the plain and Rages in the mountains (see below); And again, Charan (Haran), in Syria, is, according to the Douay version of Tobit, ‘midway’ between Nineveh and ‘Media’; And furthermore, whereas the journey from Tobit’s Ecbatana to Rages normally took “two full days”, the almost 200-mile journey from the Median Ecbatana to Rhages would have taken significantly longer. In fact it took the army of Alexander the Great 11 days at full gallop to march from the one to the other. Rightly then does Jan Simons observe (according to a Median context) that the journey referred to in the Book of Tobit “would be a forced ‘journey of two days’ even for an express messenger”. Thankfully, however, there are versions of the Book of Tobit that set us aright, with Ecbatana becoming “Bathania” (the Roman province of Batanaea), that is, the fertile Bashan, east of the River Jordan in Palestine, and Media becoming “Midian”. Thus the angel Raphael knows exactly what he is doing. Why, did he not inform the anxious Tobit that he knew the way thoroughly (as an angel would know)? So we find that the real angel Raphael was escorting the young Tobias, not eastwards, but westwards from Nineveh, to the Tigris crossing, then to Haran, and on to Bashan (where the angel then leaves on an early flight for Damascus). I discussed all of this in Volume Two of my thesis [2007], A Revised History of the Era of King Hezekiah of Judah and its Background http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/5973 (Chapter 2, pp. 38-40), where I had specifically claimed that “Rages”, a city in the mountains, must be the city of Damascus that dominated the province of Batanaea” (p. 39). Damascus, almost 700 m above sea level, is actually situated on a plateau. Secondly, I gave there very specific geographical details in order to identify this “Rages” in relation to “Ecbatana” (Tobit 5:6), which I had in turn identified (following the Heb. Londinii, or HL, fragment version of Tobit) with “Bathania”, or Bashan (possibly Herodotus’ Syrian Ecbatana as opposed to the better known Median Ecbatana). According to Tobit, “Rages is situated in the mountains, two days’ walk from Ecbatana which is in the plain”. Now Damascus is precisely two days’ walk from Bashan in the Hauran plain, as according to Jâkût el-Hamawi who says of Batanaea’s most central town of Nawâ …: “Between Nawa and Damascus is two days’ journey” (as quoted on p. 39). What further consolidates the fact that Tobit’s ‘Ecbatana’ was in a westerly direction, rather than an easterly one, is that his son Tobias, leaving Nineveh, arrived at the Tigris river in the evening; an impossibility were he heading for Median Ecbatana in the east. And, according to the Vulgate version of Tobit, Charan, that is, Haran, is situated “in the halfway” between Nineveh and Ecbatana. The traveller is clearly journeying towards the west. Whilst Bible scholars today tend to dismiss the whole geography of the Book of Tobit as nonsensical, a simple adjustment based on a genuine version (Heb. Londinii), makes perfect – even very precise (“two days walk”) – sense of it. …. The testimony of Jâkût el-Hamawi here was an absolute clincher for me … when trying to make sense of the geography of the Book of Tobit …. [End of quotes] Was I completely happy with this attempt to restore, in the face of criticism, the geography of a book of the Bible, depicting it as a westward, not an eastward, journey? Nineveh = Nineveh River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus Well, yes I was, basically, although there were still a few little knots and niggling points that I thought perhaps could be considered later. The time has now come to consider these knots and niggles. A new assessment The positives What is still patently clear to me is that the travelling party, Raphael and Tobias, could not possibly have been, as the commentators think they were, heading eastwards from Nineveh to the traditional land of Media because of the fact that the travellers arrived at the Tigris river in the evening, and that, later, they came to Charan (Haran/Harran). Therefore, I am completely happy with my first three of these six name identifications: Nineveh = Nineveh River Tigris = River Tigris Charan = Haran Media = Midian Ecbatana = Bashan Rages = Damascus It is quite possible (without hurting my reconstruction in the slightest) that “Nineveh” here was actually Calah (Nimrud), that is, Nineveh in the Genesis and Jonah sense of “the great city” complex (Genesis 10:11-12): “From that land he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city”. Cf. Jonah 3:3: “So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the Lord. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days’ journey”. For Tobit and his wife were taken into captivity by the Assyrian king, “Shalmaneser”, who, given that the family was Naphtalian, must also have been king Tiglath-pileser (2 Kings 15:29): “Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, Abel Beth Maakah, Janoah, Kedesh and Hazor. He took Gilead and Galilee, including all the land of Naphtali, and deported the people to Assyria”. To where did Tiglath-pileser remove (deport and resettle) his Israelite captives? Why, to “Calah” (greater Nineveh) and, most interestingly, to “the cities of the Medes” (2 Kings 18:11): “The king of Assyria exiled the Israelites to Assyria and settled them in Halah [Calah], in Gozan by the Habor River, and in the cities of the Medes”. The negatives Here begin the knots and niggles as referred to above. Media, Ecbatana, Rages It had occurred to me that, if Tobit’s Ecbatana was actually Bashan, as I thought it was, then why were not his relatives, Raguel and family, too (presumably also Naphtalians), in captivity away from Israel? And, whilst Bashan (Bathania) was a pretty good linguistic fit for Ecbatana - and ancient writers have, indeed, testified to more than one Ecbatana - Midian was not totally convincing for the Bashan region; though it was far more fitting for there than was the traditional land of Media (and its Ecbatana). While the name Rages (Rhages Raghai) did not fit at all for Damascus (as I had identified it), the topography and distance (as according to Jâkût el-Hamawi) seemed to me to be a perfect fit. Finally, Charan (Haran/Harran) was not really midway between Nineveh and Bashan. I had taken Tobit 10:13: “And as they were returning they came to Charan, which is in the midway to Ninive …”, as being like a casual observation of a traveller, without being meant to be geographically precise. Even after reading Royce (Richard) Erickson’s mind-blowing (2020) article: A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY (3) A PROBLEM IN CHALDAEAN AND ELAMITE GEOGRAPHY with its own Tiglath-pileser-like ‘deportations’ of the lands of Chaldea, Elam, Media and Persia hundreds of kilometres to the NW of where they are conventionally situated, I had persisted with my article, “A Common Sense Geography of the Book of Tobit”, without making any alterations, thinking that it was essentially correct - whilst being aware that it might eventually need to undergo some degree of tweaking. The truth is that Royce Erickson’s article makes all the difference to the geography of the Book of Tobit, showing that the angel Raphael knew perfectly well to where he was leading young Tobias, and that the book’s Media, Ecbatana and Rages do not stand in need of special interpretation. Thanks to Royce Erickson, an ancient may now do once again as the travelling party had done in the Book of Tobit, head westwards from “Nineveh” (Calah?) to the Tigris river, and on to Haran, and then on to Ecbatana and Rages in the land of Media. And Haran can once again be, as old Tobit had known it, “in the midway to Ninive”. Royce Erickson’s Figure 1 here shows his proposed identification of Ecbatana as Abadaniye in his (revised) land of Media: Funnily, the occasional map will show a land of Media much, much further westwards than would conventionally have been expected. Now, whether Royce Erickson’s version of Ecbatana, as the admittedly very like-named Abadaniye, is the correct one remains to be determined. If one is to take seriously the information in the book of Tobit, then Ecbatana, in a plain, must be within two days’ walk of a place called Rages, in the mountains. And Haran must be midway between Ecbatana and Nineveh. Regarding this last point, Abadaniye would appear to be perhaps a bit too far westwards to enable Haran to qualify as a midway point. Just a thought for further consideration.

Saturday, August 9, 2025

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!

Friday, August 8, 2025

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.