August 18, 1942
Dear Professor Pfeiffer,
taking into consideration that the publication of my work in the Semitic Series would after all demand the help of some foundation, I came to the conclusion not to request the acceptance of my Mns. into this Seires. I think that my book should appear without help of foundations, and might be arranged with a Unviersity Press or general publisher on a regular commercial basis.
I visited, with approval of Professor Wolfson, the Harvard University Press, and I was told by the secretary that my Mns might be of interst for the publication at expences of the Press, and he asked me to leave the Mns. for reading. As I would like to give it to the Publisher with an explaining preface, I did not leave it. I showed the secretary a letter of Prof. Horace M. Kallen of New York (known to Wolfson) who accepted without reservation my reconstruction of the history.
I shall give my Mns, acc. to your suggestion, to one of the larger Publishers, preferably a University Press (Harvard Press). In the last case, the Press will surely ask your opinion. Anyway I like to hope that you will show also henceforth the same interest in my work; I think also that you would like to reject or to accept my reconstruction, and therefore will again give attention to the Mns when provided with a preface, and a few missing chapters.
Would you regard as desirable some tables of comparison to be placed at the end of the work? I adjoin here one: Jeremiah 46 - Kadesh poem. About 18 tables like this might serve as addenda to the book.
Whe I asked you visiting you on August 6th: did any difficulty arise out fo the reconstruction of ancient history?, you put before me the question: Do not the objects of art bring testimony against the reconstruction?
I would like to give a few more details in answer to your question on the attached page.
Please, kindly handle also in the next future the material as trusted to you and Prof. Wolfson only.
A few remarks about the testimony of art, applied to the reconstruction of the history.
Time of Thutmose III. A chapter in the Mns is devoted to comparison
fo the objects of sacral art brought by T.III from Palestine with the
objects of Salomos Temple. The non-sacral booty too is of a higher
perfection and design than a pre-Israelite Canaan should be credited with.
We learn from the booty carried into Egyptchariots inlaid
with silver, gold-plated chariots, etc.of the astounding civilization
of syria at that period (T III).
Time of Ikhnaton and El-Amarna. The ivory of Samaria has Hebrew signs
of the character of Mesa stele. They are recognized as having originated
in the time of Ahab (L. Sukenik in the book of Crowfoot). Here quotations
from Crowfoot, Early Ivories from Samaria, 1938.
Time of Ramses II and the war with the Hittites. Here a few quotations from O. Puchstein, Pseudohethitische Kunst, 1890. In 1912, he wrote Boghaskoi, die Bauwerke, and at that time the archive of Boghaskoi was already unearthed. I shall look in that work, and probably I shall find that under the weight of established coevality of Boghaskoi-archive and the time of Ramses II, Puchstein did not support any more his view that the Hittite art was a product of the seventh century.
Another quotation from the same Vortrag
The author of these lines did not suspect that the art of Boghaskoi still was coeval with Chta of Ramses II, but that Ramses II himself lived in the seventh century.
Time of Ramses III.
The bas-relief: Heads of Shardana warriors.
The head-apparel of Peleset is identical with head apparel of the Persians
of Persepolis. This we discussed already.