Mention of "Aman" (Haman) in Book of Tobit is Most Confusing

 

Taken from: http://www.mainlesson.com/display.php?author=james&book=legends&story=adam

....

 

In the Book of Tobit in the Apocrypha you will find mention in several places of a man called Achiacharus, who was a relation of Tobit, In the first chapter (verses 21, 22) you read that he was a great officer at the court of king Esarhaddon; and at the end of the book (xiv. 10) you may learn something about his story; for Tobit says to his son Tobias, "Remember, my son, how Aman handled Achiacharus that brought him up, how out of light he brought him into darkness, and how he rewarded him again; yet Achiacharus was saved, but the other had his reward, for he went down into darkness," Then it goes on, "Manasses gave alms, and escaped the snare that was set for him, but Aman fell into the snare and perished."

Now of late years the book has come to light which tells the whole history of Achiacharus (or Ahikar, as we shall call him), and you will see as you go on that in the Book of Tobit some mistakes have been made in the names, and that instead of Aman we shall have to read Nadan, and instead of Manasses, Achiacharus.

....
 

AMAIC Comment: Aman is a variation of Haman, the wicked king of the Book of Esther, and has been wrongly inserted into a version of the Book of Tobit.



Greeks Amalgamated Eastern Sage, Ahiqar (= Achior), with Aesop

 

For complete article, see:

http://www.academia.edu/3209219/Akicharos_vol._3

....

1. Ahiqar, Aesop and the Vita -Author

There was a series of similarities between the figures of Ahiqar and Aesop, probably originating in a common repository of narrative motifs and gnomicmaterial widespread in the Eastern Mediterranean. These analogies facilitated comparison and rapprochement of the two heroes, as soon as Ahiqar’s story became known to the Greek world in early Hellenistic times. Both Ahiqar and Aesop were narrators of fables, using them for admonitory as well as censorious purposes. Ahiqar addressed such parables to his adoptive son, in order to teach him wisdom and correct behaviour (thus in the version of Elephantine) or to reprove him for his perfidy (thus in later versions). Correspondingly, Aesop employed his fables as a vehicle of political advice to the Samians or of blame against the Delphians and their insidious accusations. Further, both Ahiqar and Aesop appeared in the role of the innocent man falling victim to a treacherous scheme, unjustly persecuted and condemned on false charges. Thus, both underwent a kind of “death and resurrection” experience: Ahiqar was hidden in an underground crypt, much like a grave, until he was rehabilitated and returned to light again. Aesop was put to death, but his soul came back to life. In both cases, justice was restored in the end, and the people responsible for the hero’s persecution (respectively Nadin and the Delphians) were punished.
 

....