The Introduction presents the author's "remarkable discovery,"based on a linguistic analysis of biblical place names anbd a personal tour of West Arabia, which is in turn based on the assumption that "the Hebrew Bible has been consistently mistranslated,"because Hebrew was out of use by the 5th or 6th century B.C.; hence, the received text is a reconstruction.
In Chapter 1, the "Jewish World of Antiquity,"the author asserts that the "Hebrew bible is principally a record of the Jewish [sic!] historical experience in West Arabia," with the "Israelistes"a local tribe in that area. The Philistines are also from West Arabia, where the Egyptian campaigns, the "Return," and the "king of Israel"are to be located. The "Jewish migrations" to Palestine are attributed to the possibility of a civil war between Judah and Israel, also occurring In West Arabia. The Jews subsequently forgot their original homeland because of the language shift from Hebrew to Aramaic and the Bible was revocalized to fit the new language. Biblical Scholars, archaeologists, et al., are therefore misled in seeking evidence regarding the Bible in Palestine. Mesopotamian and Egyptian records regarding biblical matters must also be shifted to reflect a West Arabian location.
Chapter 2 deals with methodology. Here, the author notes that biblical studies to date must be "unlearned," especially biblical Hebrew, since nothing is known "of its orthography, grammar, syntax, or idiom." Rather, if a set of place names can be found in West Arabia that "clearly derive" from a language consonantally identical with, or similar to, biblical Hebrew or biblical Aramaic, then, by "toponymic correspondence" they must be the one mentioned in the Bible. With this in mind, the author continues, in Chapter 3, to locate the "true land of the Bible," namely, the area of Asir, in the West Arabian highlands. A detailed description is presented of the geography, topography, climate, flora, fauna, minerology, etc. of the area in question.
The succeeding chapters of the volume are designed to reinforce the author's contention that biblical history should be sought in the West Arabian area. Geographical data, criticism of prior translations of epigraphic materials, retranslations, and other approaches are introduced to reinforce the author's main thesis. Hence, we are informed that Gerar must be located in West Arabia; that the Gallus expedition took place there; that linguists are in error regarding the Siloam Inscription, the Lachish Ostaraca, the Moabite Stone, the Sargon II lists, and the Amarna place names, that biblical archaeology is nonscientific [Comment from transcriber -- it certainly is political, if not nonscientific]; that tehom is a geographical name; that the Jordan is not a river, but, in the derived sense of the word, means "skyline," and therefore, the escarpment of inland Asir; that the "Pharoah of Egypt" was a West Arabian deity; that Lebanon is actually in Yemen; that Judah is the "hill country flanking the maritime side of Asir"; that the tribe of Judah "apparently" resided in Wadi Adam in the southern Hijaz; that the Mitanni must be relocated West Arabia; that Melchizedek is not a name, but an "idiomatic expression"; that "Elohim" represents the local pantheon, with other references to "Yahweh" referring to various local deities; that the sacrifice of Isaac was "originally told to explain how monotheism first began"; that the Hebrews were a West Arabian "folk" living in the woods; that "Hebrew" was "certainly not the language of the "Hebrews," but rather a language widely spoken in West Arabia; that the Philistines were not from Crete, nor were they in Palestine, but rather, also came from West Arabia; that the "Promised Land" actually extends from Jizran to Wadi Adam in Asir; that Junayanah, in West Bishah is one of the gardens of Eden; and that the Song of Songs, along with other biblical poetry, came from Asir.
In the Epilogue, the author "hopes" that a "reassessment" of the entire Hebrew Bible will be done, hence establishing the veracity of Hebrew history to "new heights" (i.e., by properly relocating it in West Arabia). The Appendix contains the author's "onomastic evidence" relating to the twelve tribes of Israel (in West Arabia), with the tribal names related to place names. The voluminous notes section to each chapter further "derive" biblical place names, etc. to their West Arabian "locations."
A proper review of this book would unfortunately subject the reader to a volume far larger than the one being reviewed. The sheer enormity, page by page, of "identifications," transmutations [sic!], blantant historical error, misconceptions, and similar problems with the scholarship, preclude considerations within the scope of any "review." It is difficult to understand how such a volume could have been foisted upon an unsuspecting public. Perhaps the scholarly reader will find a certain degree of amusement in appreciated the skill of the author in his attempted linguistic exercises, but the lay reader might, regretably, be misled by the appearance of the "scholarship" presented. To assume that similar, or even identical, place names are proof of "identity" between two places is palpably absurd [Comment from transcriber: and yet it is done again and again in Biblical scholarship, e.g. the comments in A.N.E. about the location of Ur of the Chaldees]. To declare that archaeology, with its modern chronometric techniques, cannot place occupations correctly is contrary to fact . To ignore the linguistic analyses of biblical Hebrew from the Massoretes to modern scholarship is presumptuous. To dismiss casually all modern scholarship in the field is unscholarly in the extreme. To display ignorance of published archaeological and other data in favor of selected, "favorable" quotations is likewise not the way knowledge is advanced.
In short, this reviewer can see no reason why this volume was published, either in its original German edition, or in English translation.
Department of Anthropology University of Utah Philip C. Hammond
[Comment from transcriber: I suggest that Salibi just wanted to open up the discussion of the possibility that Israel and Judah were in West Arabia. Unfortunately, no one, to my knowledge, has taken him seriously enough to spend the enormous amount of time needed for a true scholarly review of his evidence and thesis. -- Thomas Woods]