Sven

Read Finkelstein&Silverman. Their hypotheses is that the Hebrews adopted this Hyksos story to legitimate their claims for Canaan (their god gave it to them).

Helo

I never said they did, I compared the bible to Aesop's Fables based on content

So myth is based in reality?

We dont have any confirmation YET. However if you think about it in context, there probably wouldnt be a record. The plauges were separate events that ancient people probably wouldnt have connected. Events that, on thier own, probably werent anything too special. If there was any record at all, it was probably in municipal records that were probably destroyed with the colapse of the empire.

I have issues with Jung and the archetypes. Dividing people up under 4 groups like we're food groups is a bad idea in my opinion.

I stated generally that many cultures who have never had any contact share similar aspects of mythology. And no Im not saying there was a worldwide flood, theres no evidence for there having been one.

A certain number of the Hyksos may have fled, perhaps a small armed contingent......

The Jews were NEVER given any sort of control in Ancient Egypt. They gained control in provinces like Judea under Roman rule, but the Egyptians never gave the Jews any real measure of control.

Possible, but I would have to say its more likely that a large localized flood made people think that the flood covered the whole world.

I dunno, Ive seen some pretty gnarled looking women in my lifetime And actually thats a modern-day myth.

Why?

Amaleq13

On some level, yes. Even if it is only the general reality of the human experience.

With regard to global flood myths, they are clearly not based on reality in the sense of an actual flood covering the entire planet but based on the reality of the ubiquity of devastating floods in areas where people tend to settle and the reality that, to the vast majority of people throughout history, the origins of our species have been a mystery.

That multiple cultures have developed origin myths for their people that involved flooding is really not remarkable at all.

Anat

I need clarification regarding the Hyksos. I understand they were of Levant origin and presumably nomadic (as they were known as the shepherd kings), but what is known of the circumstances of their arrival in Egypt and attaining power there? How many of them were there? When they were driven out of Egypt where did they go? Did they resume a pastoral lifestyle or did they settle somewhere?

I understand the argument against ancient Israel being derived directly from the Hyksos is from material culture - the artefacts of Iron Age hill country settlements are continuous with those of Canaanite culture, with no Egyptian influence. Was there a post-Egyptian expulsion Hyksos culture anywhere? Who in Canaan would have been aware of the Hyksos story?

The purpose of my questions is to understand when did the exodus story become incorporated into the Israelites' and the Judahites' stories of their origins.

Gawen

I just have one little item:
The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as about 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men could mean that a total of more than 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt at a time when the whole population of Egypt was less than 2,000,000. Barring the contradiction, if...IF....2,000,000 people left, there would most probably some sort of archaeological evidence somewhere.

FatherMithras

*sigh* Not THOSE archetypes.

Exactly, thus the best conclusion is simply psychological similarities resulting in similar myths.

Please please read up on what happened to the Hyksos.

Helo, you're not reading what you reply to.

"Ummm... Have you read the Bible? The story I told was directly from it. According to the Jews they were the unofficial rulers for a time and the Pharoah was only the figurehead. This never actually happened, but it IS the jewish mythos."

No, it isn't. I seriously suggest you don't continue this thread until you've read the relevant material, you're in over your head. You're a good guy (girl?) but you don't know the history or mythology you're talking about.

... Because they would have been absolutely freaking incredible? Heheh, would you not write down "OMFG...it's been DARK for days and blood water with teh first born son lawl"

If you use this logic we should accept atlantis, bigfoot, loch ness monster etc. There's no evidence where there should be, and the only people who have the story can be proved to have been incapable of being in it.

Helo

Your absolutely right, which is why I have serious doubts if as many as was claimed in the bible actually did leave.

Look at it from a tactical standpoint. Egyptian chariots had two to three people per chariot. 600 chariots, best case scenario, had 1,800 men. Now compare that to the 600,000 that the Hebrews were said to have. The men probably outnumbered the women two to one, so lets say 60% of the Hebrews were men. Of that, maybe...80% of them were able to fight (Not too old, too young, or too sick). Thats 288,000 men. The Egyptians are outnumbered probably a hundred to one (I suck with ratios). This is before the battle even starts. The Hebrews would have overwhelmed the Egyptians with sheer force of numbers even with the most rudementary of weapons. And the Egyptians are not stupid, they did not build one of the longest lasting empires in history by being militarily stupid.

Now look at it logistically, the sheer ammount of supplies you'd need for 200,000 people for 40 years (Not all of whom could walk) would be astronomical at best. You'd need so many supplies you couldnt carry it all, you'd suck a nation dry trying to do it.

Now reduce 200,000 to a more manageable number. Say....two or three thousand. 600 chariots seems alot more fitting for an army of a couple thousand. A group of desert peoples (who already had experience with the desert) could make the journey from Egypt to somewhere around the area of modern day Israel in a year and change with a feasible ammount of supplies.

Pharoah's dealing with the Hebrews was an incredible run of bad luck combined with pride that could have resulted in the slaughter of Pharoah and his army.

I disagree with the idea of archetypes of any sort when it comes to people.

Where exactly would I read about women's vagina's having teeth?
And Im a guy, for the record

Following the alternative theories about the plagues (That they were scientifically occuring phenomina that were misinterpreted) they would have been seen as just mildly unusual and not worth writing home about.

Part of science (And history) is filling in certain gaps with plausible scientific theories based on previous knowleage.

QRUEL

thank you. that was my point.

QRUEL

I like the "YET" disclaimer as if over 2000 years wasn't enough.

yeah, who would think that every first born dying "weren't anything too special" as you put it. This seems like a pretty huge shared event that someone, anyone outside of the bible would have commented on.

Helo

The Dead Sea Scrolls werent found untill the late 1940's, things that get burried in the desert can be lost for a long long time. Whole cities have been lost for longer. If a CITY can get lost for thousands of years, its perfectly reasonable to assume a simple clay tablet could disapear for longer .

The fact that theres no Egyptian record of the event would seem to lend credence to the idea that the striking down of the firstborn son was metaphorical.