Protect Democracy & Expose Western Liberal Democracy

Posts tagged ‘Judah’

Is it “Shasu of Yhw” or “Shasu and/with Yhu” (Hyksos+Judah)?

Egyptians beating Shasu spies (detail from the Battle of Kadesh (1274 BC ) wall-carving)

ta Shasu Yhu or Hyksos Judah land

An ancient carving shows Kmtians (ancient Egyptians) beating Shasu spies (detail from the Battle of Kadesh (1274 BC) wall-carving). Two Kmtian texts, one dated to the period of Amenhotep III (14th century BCE), the other to the age of Ramesses II (13th century BCE), refer to ‘Yahu in the land of the Šosū-nomads’ (t3 š3św yhw).

It seems that the Kmtians were aware that the Aram region was invaded by two different and cooperating nomadic groups. The first and larger group the Kmtians called them “Shasu” which means the nomads. The second and smaller group the Kmtians called them “Yhw” which could mean the Yhu, referring to the Judah tribe of the Israelite, which turned into Hebrew.

This “Shasu + Yhw” is a proof that there was a coalition between the remnants of the expelled Turkic Mongolian Hyksos (Shasu) and the Judah tribe (turned Hebrew/Haberu) targeting the eastern region bordering Kmt.

And Kmt was acting to maintain stability and security in that region to fend off any invasion or migration resulting from the chaos that led to the Great Bronze Age Collapse in 1177 BC and the influxes of Sea Peoples.

The original name given by Kmtians to the invaders who colonized Kmt was certainly not Hyksos (heqa khasut, “ruler(s) of/from foreign lands”). But the term Hyksos was made by the colonizing occupation force to look respectable and of authority. Probably the original name of the Hyksos was just Shasu (nomads). The following map shows areas of reported Habiru activity during the Late Bronze IIA period (based on the Amarna letters corpus)

On page 17 in a study by Faried Adrom and Matthias Müller, titled “The Tetragrammaton in Egyptian Sources – Facts and Fiction”:
[Karl-Theodor Zauzich compiled additional (partly unpublished) attestations from Demotic sources in the expression rmT jhw(A) which he interprets as ‘man from Juda.’ However, the construction is used in Demotic word formation with toponyms (designating a place of origin, such as rmT-kmy ‘man-Egypt’ > ‘Egyptian’), divine names (designating a devotion to or a connection with a deity, such as rmT-inp ‘man-Anubis’ > ‘person dedicated to Anubis’), infinitives (designating a profession, such as rmT-Xn ‘man-row’ > ‘oarsman, rower’) as well as ‘adjectives’ (designating a characteristic or virtue, such as rmT-swg ‘man-stupid’ > ‘idiot’).

Zauzich, however, assumes the word formation with rmT to equate an otherwise unrecognized suffix =da in the word ‘Judah,’ thus rmT-jhw = Jud-ean = Ju=da. Be that as it may, the data do not help to settle the question whether jhw(A) designates a toponym or a divine name]

According to many indications it is seems very reasonable to conclude that there were two nomadic groups colonizing Aram and threatening Kmt. The two groups were the remnants of expelled Turkic Mongolian Hyksos, the proto-Jews, and the second group was the Judah tribe, the proto-Hebrew.

Areas of reported Habiru activity during the Late Bronze IIA period (based on the Amarna letters corpus)

%d bloggers like this: