Re: Archaeology of Adiabene?
In Response To: Archaeology of Adiabene? ()

Charles, in you last post you wrote, and quoted the following;

"In a discussion of the various cities called Antioch, Eisenman writes (p 5) in 'The New Testament Code':

"Finally, there was 'Antiochia Charax', 'Charax Spasini' or present day Basrah at the mouth of the Tigris River on the Persian Gulf and in the birthplace of the Third-Century religious teacher, the founder of Mani-chaeism, Mani."

Since I do not know or have ever not heard of "Charax Spasini", it is a wonder of mine how it or that has escaped my observation! So, just how do we descipher "Charax Spasini?"

" In Josephus, Charax Spasini was the place where Izates, the favorite son of Queen Helen of Adiabene (characterized by Josephus, as we shall see, as her 'only begotten') first met the itinerant merchant cum missionary 'Ananias', an individual also apparently appearing in both Eusebius and Acts. In the latter, he rather greets Paul in 'Damascus' at the time of the latter's conversion on 'the Damascus Road'. Adiabene was the area around th(e) source of the Tigris in Northern Iraq, roughly equivalent to modern-day Kurdistan and not very distinct from what Eusebius calls 'the Land of the Edessenes' of 'Osrhoeans' (Assyrians 'beyond the Euphrates' above."

So, does Eisenman really correlate the "Edesssenes", which could easily be defined as the "Essene's", with the group he calls the "Osrhoeanes?" If so, there seems to be a new world arising from the ashes, so to speak!.

"Eisenman discusses the claim of Eusebius of finding the Edessene Chancellery Office records in which Abgarus is called 'the Great King of the Peoples'."
Here, it seems you or Eiseman, correlate Abgarus as an "Essene", and not an " Edesssene", and why is there a difference?

"It looks like the evidence for our trio Agbarus, Helen, and Izates is entirely textual (Eusebius, Josephus, Book of Acts). But you might want to do a more concentrated search on this topic in Eisenman's 'Jesus Brother of James' and 'The New Testament Code'. The references cited in the second book are posted on line."

I would suggest that we exclude any mentions of the words of Eusebius, because of his bias?