Henry Aubin - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Henry Aubin
Gorgias Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2020
Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2002
Choice Reviews Online, 2003
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
See pp. 232-248
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
See pp 220-232.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures , 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between ... more This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between Hebrews and Africans in 701 BC (2002) that an army of Egypt's Kushite Dynasty (also known as the Twenty-fifth Dynasty) was influential in saving Jerusalem from capture by Assyrian forces. Eight scholars from a range of disciplines—biblical studies, Assyriology, Egyptology and Nubiology—assess the thesis and explore related ideas. Most of the evaluators tilt in varying degrees toward the plausibility of the book's thesis. The volume concludes with Mr. Aubin's response to each essay.
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures
This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between ... more This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between Hebrews and Africans in 701 BC (2002) that an army of Egypt's Kushite Dynasty (also known as the Twenty-fifth Dynasty) was influential in saving Jerusalem from capture by Assyrian forces. Eight scholars from a range of disciplines—biblical studies, Assyriology, Egyptology and Nubiology—assess the thesis and explore related ideas. Most of the evaluators tilt in varying degrees toward the plausibility of the book's thesis. The volume concludes with Mr. Aubin's response to each essay.
Gorgias Press eBooks, Dec 31, 2020
Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2002
Choice Reviews Online, 2003
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Jerusalem's Survival, Sennacherib's Departure, and the Kushite Role in 701 BCE, 2020
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
See pp. 232-248
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
See pp 220-232.
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures , 2019
JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it hav... more JOURNAL OF HEBREW SCRIPTURES Kushite Egypt's influence in those domains is consistent with it having obtained an advantageous resolution to the 701 conflict. 4. The Twenty-fifth Dynasty was known in the post-701 era for its military prowess, a reputation consistent with success in the 701 conflict. Attesting to this reputation for prowess are an Assyrian text by Esarhaddon (Sennacherib's successor), a Judahite text by Nahum, and a Greek text by Strabo. Furthermore, at a time of later Assyrian aggression (671 BCE), the important Phoenician city-state of Tyre allied itself with the Twenty-fifth Dynasty; it is hard to see how Kushite Egypt could have been seen as a credible ally had it failed in 701. 5. If the Kushites played a key role in Jerusalem's-and Judah's-survival, one might logically expect subsequent biblical writings to present a positive opinion of Kushites. That is indeed what one finds: few, in any, other foreign people receive such favorable treatment. (Aubin's opinion is at odds with the common scholarly view that the Bible shows low regard for Kushites. 2) 6. The structural logic of the Rab-shakeh's speech in 2 Kgs 18:19-22 assumes that Egypt was reliable. He questions the Jerusalemites' trust both in Egypt, the broken reed, and in YHWH, whose high places Hezekiah had removed. Many scholars have latched onto the first half of the Rab-shakeh's double object to suggest that Egypt was unreliable, but by implication if Egypt was untrustworthy, so was YHWH. Aubin's unconventional assessment of the biblical writer's treatment of this speech is that both were reliable. Aubin then speculates on how the Kushites might have pulled off a successful challenge to Sennacherib; he says that his scenario should be seen as "musings" that are "playful" and "imaginative," rather than based on the kind of evidence he has for the six arguments listed above. Aubin goes on to state that up until the late nineteenth century some Western scholars, often prominent ones, accepted either the hybrid rescue or a full rescue (in which the Kushite-led army was totally responsible for saving Jerusalem). Earlier, in mid-century, Darwinism among other factors may have helped provide the intellectual soil in which this intensification of racial bias grew; by the 1880s, when seven European powers undertook the wholesale colonization of Africa (a rush that included Britain waging a particularly difficult war in Sudan, once the homeland of the Kushites), this intensification became quite manifest. Aubin documents leading Victorian-era scholars' marginalization and often disparagement of the Kushites' place in history. Finally, Aubin shows how the events of 701 helped 2 Taking a similar position independently and in a later study is R.
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between ... more This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between Hebrews and Africans in 701 BC (2002) that an army of Egypt's Kushite Dynasty (also known as the Twenty-fifth Dynasty) was influential in saving Jerusalem from capture by Assyrian forces. Eight scholars from a range of disciplines—biblical studies, Assyriology, Egyptology and Nubiology—assess the thesis and explore related ideas. Most of the evaluators tilt in varying degrees toward the plausibility of the book's thesis. The volume concludes with Mr. Aubin's response to each essay.
The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures
This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between ... more This volume focuses on Henry Aubin's thesis in The Rescue of Jerusalem: The Alliance between Hebrews and Africans in 701 BC (2002) that an army of Egypt's Kushite Dynasty (also known as the Twenty-fifth Dynasty) was influential in saving Jerusalem from capture by Assyrian forces. Eight scholars from a range of disciplines—biblical studies, Assyriology, Egyptology and Nubiology—assess the thesis and explore related ideas. Most of the evaluators tilt in varying degrees toward the plausibility of the book's thesis. The volume concludes with Mr. Aubin's response to each essay.
Warsaw University Press, 2010
Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, Vol. 2. Warsaw University, 27 August - 2 Se... more Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Nubian Studies, Vol. 2. Warsaw University, 27 August - 2 September 2006.
Session Paper by Henry T. Aubin: "The Outcome of Prince Taharqa's Military Expedition to Judah"
Editor: W. Godlewski, A. Lajtar
ISBN: 978-83-235-0747-5
Journal of Hebrew Scriptures, 2019
See p
Doubleday Canada, 2002
Six arguments are presented for why a Kushite-Egyptian army would have influenced the Assyrian ar... more Six arguments are presented for why a Kushite-Egyptian army would have influenced the Assyrian army to depart from Jerusalem in 701 BCE, a turning point in world history.
The Globe and Mail, 2002
Book review of "The Rescue of Jerusalem" (June 2002)
The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 2002
Book Review by Robert Fikes Jr. of Henry Aubin's "Rescue of Jerusalem" November 2002