Nialler

I can't believe that Magus hasn't made a bigger contribution here. C'mon, Magus, let's have your views on the Exodus....

Celsus

Not surprising. I cannot recall Magus ever responding to anything I have ever said, even when I asked him directly and nicely. I doubt he'd do the honours with spin either.

Say spin, we were (I was) just talking about Manetho at Ebla. You going to come back?

Joel

capnkirk

Hey guys!

Doesn't the historical fact that Canaan was an Egyptian vassal state from 1450 BCE (the year of Ph. Thutmose III conquest) until well after the reign of Solomon virtually eliminate the possibility that during this time the Egyptians would allow several hundred thousand former slaves to "escape" to sanctuary in Canaan? Wouldn't that be rather like attempting to escape Federal jurisdiction by moving from New York to Oregon (OK then...Montana)?

Read the treaty http://touregypt.net/peacetreaty.htm that followed the Battle of Kadesh (Located well to the north of Canaan, about 30 mi ENE of Tripoli along the Lebanon-Syrian border) 1294 BCE, between Rameses II and King Hattusili).

This would tend to push any possible date for a Jewish Exodus from Egypt back to a time prior to 1450 BCE into a time immediately following the expulsion (they were 'driven' out) of the Hyksos from Egypt into Canaan. Like so many other OT epic stories (the Flood, et al), could this be yet another case of Hebrew appropriation of existing legend or history and rewriting it to suit their own purposes (much as Hollywood takes a best selling novel and makes it into a movie that bears only superficial resemblance to the book (example: SUM OF ALL FEARS, by Tom Clancy))?

Celsus

Hi capnkirk,
Where do you get the "well after the reign of Solomon" bit from? As I wrote in my intro piece (also available somewhere at II but the search engine isn't up), the Egyptians didn't establish themselves in Canaan immediately after the Hyksos expulsion (and there are various debates about whether it even was the Egyptians going after the Hyksos in Canaan). Secondly, the so-called Amarna period (c. 1400-1200 BCE) is the only period we can confidently assert Egyptian dominance. Solomon, if he existed, would have ascended around 950 BCE.

Joel

capnkirk

Sorry, I didn't read your eblaforum piece (the search engine...OK?). I would, however, argue that Egyptian dominance in Canaan began with Thutmose III's conquest in 1450 BCE. There are also passages in the narrative of Solomon's reign that 'hint' that Israel was itself an Egyptian vassal state during this period.

But even the dates you quoted still support my point about Canaan's fealty to Egypt and the probability that Canaan would have reacted very negatively to the prospect of harboring half a million 'fugitive Egyptian slaves'. Even if such entry into Canaan was military in nature (a la Joshua @ Jericho) and the invaders were winning, one would expect that the defenders would try to enlist Egypt's military support to repulse them. Since the OT fails to mention ANY Egyption intervention on behalf of the Canaanites, one can safely assume that there was none, and deduce that there was no military invasion by the Israelites either.

Celsus

No problems. It was easy referencing for me, and I apologise for my terseness.
How would you argue this? What passages in the Bible? Are you aware of Shoshenq's/Shishak's campaign circa the "Solomonic era"?
Firstly, no one is considering "half a million" slaves. Even (academic) fundamentalists think this is a translational or scribal error. Secondly, the lack of Egyptian intervention is a very circumstancial approach to arguing against a conquest (what do you make of their troubles with various Sea Peoples from the thirteenth century on?). More probably, you should examine destruction layers at our usual candidates. Coogan's Oxford History of the Biblical World has a wonderful table (3.1) which surveys 31 cities said to have been taken by Joshua (and of course the Septuagint and Masoretic texts disagree on which ones) and the sites identified with them (20 positive confirmations) to some interesting results. For example, you'll probably find it bemusing that one of the "certain" candidates of Lachish was destroyed at a Biblically appropriate time (mid-13th century), but then rebuilt as an Egypto-Canaanite city and occupied until 1150. Similar things happened to a few others at this time, but ended up being either rebuilt or as Sea People/Philistine or Egyptian cities, or are too far apart to correspond with other cities' destructions (Hazor--thirteenth century; Bethel, Jokneam--late thirteenth; Megiddo, Taanach, Kedesh, Dor--twelfth century, etc.).

Altogether, unfortunately, most are destroyed at an inappropriate time or are written of for other reasons (e.g. Lachish) or have no evidence of any destruction. All of which, of course, is the best argument against an invasion campaign. My own view is that the lack of Egyptian influence on Canaanite pottery during this period is enough to squash an Egyptian origin theory of anything resembling an ethnic group. Unfortunately, I dislike Coogan for his overflowing confidence in maximalism and generally rubbish chapters later regarding the period of the Judges and pre-Exilic Israel and Judah (my one criticism, go out and get that book if you are interested in this). I don't mean to be preachy, but you can get much more out of this if you go deeper into the subject.

Joel

capnkirk

Joel,

I absolutely concur that 'lack of Egyptian interference' is pretty flimsy in and of itself, but we are not considering that factor in a vacuum. My real quarrel is not with what 'even fundamentalist scholars' might have been forced to admit. My quarrel is with the larger than life, miracle-packed (Red Sea crossing, Josua at Jericho, et al), epic saga, starring Yahweh, Moses, and Joshua as presented in all surviving versions of the OT, and believed by the faithful. That there might have been some miracle-free migration of a few thousand Jews (even if demonstrated to be true) does nothing to offset the propagandized myth of "THe Exodus". FWIW, I lean toward the expulsion of the Hyksos around 1515 BCE as the 'kernel of truth' that the fantastic myth contains, and am interested in evidence that tends to impact (favorably or not) that hypothesis. Egyptian hegemony in that period is but one plank in that platform.

Everywhere one looks, whether to Egyptian or Canaanite archaeology, what evidence there is tends to strongly refute any significant influx of outsiders into Canaan or exodus from Egypt at anywhere near the subject time frame...strongly enough to convince me that this is just another manufactured legend intended to convince their potential opponents that "yeah, weee baaadd!!"

Doctor X

Indeed . . . and to justify the contemporary situation.

--J.D.