Dating the Exodus, The Hyksos Expulsion of 1540/1530 B.C.E.?
06 Feb. 2001
Revisions through 05 September 2008
Please click here for this website's most important article: Why the Bible Cannot be the Word of God.
For Christians visiting this website my most important article is:
The Reception of God's Holy Spirit: How the Hebrew Prophets _contradict_ Christianity's Teachings.
Please click here for my latest map (21 Nov. 2009) showing the site of Israel's "crossing of the Red Sea"
in the Exodus as being at Ras el Ballah (my Baal-zephon)
I highly reccomend to the reader, "Dating the Exodus," a ThD dissertation by Dr. Stephen C. Meyers (1997, Trinity Evangelical Seminary, Florida), which discusses various proposals for the Exodus' date using Jewish and Non-Jewish sources in addition to the biblical evidence. He favors the Hyksos Expulsion as being behind the Exodus traditions, and notes this was the common understanding of the Early Christian period. cf. the following url: http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodusdate.htm
Another reccomended article is by David Goldstein (published 24 July 2006) titled "Of Pharaohs and Dates: Critical Remarks on the Dating and Historicity of the Exodus From Egypt." He calculates an Exodus as occurring circa 1447 or 1528 BCE (the latter of which by _my calculations_ falls in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos). His article, however, primarily critiques a 1312 BCE Exodus date (found in the Rabbinical Seder Olam Rabbah) espoused by Jonathan Adler, "Dating the Exodus: A New Perspective." pp. 44-51, in the journal Jewish Bible Quarterly 23 (1995). cf. the following url: http://www.talkreason.org/PrinterFriendly.cfm?article=/articles/exodus1.cfm
Please click here for another very fine article by Wikipedia on the Exodus and the "problems" facing scholars in identifying when it occurred.
Special note on dating terminology: B.C. means "Before Christ" while B.C.E. meaning "Before the Common Era," is preferred by some scholars.
Also reccomended:
Please click here for the evidence that the Pentateuch, which includes the Exodus account is _not_ a reliable eyewitness account regarding the events it attests to.
This article has seen a sudden increase in "visits" over the past 7 days apparently as a result of Simcha Jacobovici's TV documentary The Exodus Decoded (Televised 20, 24, 26 August 2006 here in Massachusetts on the History Channel).
For a detailed point-by-point critique of Jacobovici's Exodus Decoded by Chris Heard of Pepperdine College
Jacobovici associated the Exodus with the Hyksos Expulsion and dated the event to ca. 1500 BCE (B.C.E.=Before the Common Era, an alternate scholarly designation for B.C.=Before Christ). Jacobovici was apparently aware that some scholars dated the Exodus to circa 1446 BCE on the basis of 1 Kings 6:1 chronology. He was also aware that the Hyksos Expulsion associated with Pharaoh Ahmose I was a mid 16th century BCE event and that almost 100 years separated the Hyksos expulsion from the 1446 BCE Exodus date, and that because of this discrepancy, some scholars had rejected the Exodus as being a Hyksos Expulsion.
What Jacobovici _was not aware of_ was that the Catholic scholar Eusebius as preserved by Jerome fixed the Exodus at circa 1512 B.C., just 12 years earlier than Jacobovici's circa 1500 B.C. Exodus date (cf. below).
Jacobovici was also apparently _unaware_ that a number of scholars had come to the conclusion that the 1446 BCE date preserved in 1 Kings 6:1 appeared to be CONTRADICTED by internal data preserved in the books of Joshua, Judges, 1st and 2d Samuel and Kings (as well as Acts 13:16-22). When this data was factored in with Solomon's 4th year (circa 966 BCE when the Jerusalem Temple was begun to be built), it yielded an Exodus falling in the reign of Ahmose I. This data better aligns the Hyksos Expulsion with the Exodus than Jacobovici's 1500 BCE Exodus date which was simply _his attempt_ to bring the 1446 BCE Exodus "somewhat closer in time" to Ahmose I and the Hyksos Expulsion.
My below article notes that a number of scholars, Josephus (79 AD?), Jack (1925), De Vries (1962), Hoffmeier (1996), Kitchen (2003) and Goldstein (2006) and "others" have observed that 1 Kings 6:1's statement that 480 years elapsed from the Exodus and the 4th year of Solomon's reign appears to be CONTRADICTED by the internal chonological evidence of the Bible, suggesting almost 600 years elapsed not 480 years. I have noted that when this data is added to Solomon's 4th year reckoned by some as ca. 966/967 BCE, the Exodus falls in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos.
Please be advised that I _now_ understand that a "conflation and fusion" exists of events appearing in the Bible's Exodus narratives: Sites like Arad and Ai which were destroyed in the 3rd millennium BCE, the Hyksos expulsion of 1540-1530 BCE, Ramesside Era events in the Sinai and Arabah, and places existing only in Late Iron II, 640-562 BCE. Mainstream scholarship understands Israel's settling of the Hill Country is Iron I, ca. 1230-1130 BCE based on archaeological findings. Why then does the Bible's chronology have an Exodus "hundreds of years" earlier?
The answer is very surprising and has been preserved for almost 2000 years in the writings of an Egyptian priest/historian called Manetho. He wrote a history of Egypt in the 3rd century BCE for his Hellenistic Greek overlord Ptolemy II. He noted that TWO EXPULSIONS occurred in Egypt's history of Asiatics. The first was of the Hyksos of the mid 16th century and then another in the Ramesside era. He understood that the Hyksos fled to and settled at Jerusalem, but that 592 or 612 years later (Josephus' two reckonings) "their descendants" reinvaded Egypt, resettling at the town they had been expelled from earlier called Avaris. After 13 years of "lording it" over the eastern delta, the Ramessides expelled the Hyksos' descendants a SECOND TIME, and they eventually again settled at Jerusalem. The Jewish historian Josephus (1st century CE) was adamant that the 16th century expulsion was the Exodus based on _his calculations_ of the Bible's chronology and furious that Manetho had said the Exodus was preserved in a Ramesside expulsion! Modern archaeology has established the Israelite settlement of the Canaanite Hill Country from Galilee to the Negev as portrayed in the Bible, was in Ramesside times. Please click here for my article on Manetho vs. Josephus on the dating of the Exodus. If Manetho is correct, that Avaris was resettled by Canaanites in Ramesside times, and expelled again in that era, perhaps this answers the "great mystery" as to why the pottery of the IRON IA settlements is _Canaanite_ in appearance and _not_ Egyptian? The answer: 13 years was apparently too short a period of time for the "reinvading" Canaanite descendants of the Hyksos to adopt Egyptian potting techniques. They probably cast their Canaanite pots in Egypt and still were casting them in the "Canaanite manner" when they settled AGAIN near Jerusalem in the Hill Country. Not until Egypt abandoned Canaan circa 1130 BCE under Ramesses VI was the land wide-open for conquest by Philistines and Israelites. The "original" article, below, will remain intact with some minor revisions and updates, but is _superceded_ by the above observations of Josephus and Manetho.
One of the "first" problems to be faced is that the Bible exists today in several CONTRADICTING recensions which provide "different dates" for the creation of the world and the Exodus. One often sees the date of 1445 BC for the Exodus at many Protestant Evangelical Websites. This date is based on the chronology developed in the 17th century AD by Archbishop James Ussher of Ireland, which later in the 18th century appears in the margins of numerous King James Version Bibles (the KJV began printing in 1611 AD). Ussher calculated Creation at 4004 BC.
The Catholic Bible is, in part, a recension of the Septuaginta believed to have been compiled at Alexandria Egypt in Greek for Jews by Jews in the 3rd century BC. Catholic scholars fix creation at 5199 BC instead of 4004 BC. Why? Because the Septuagint gives different ages for the pre-flood patriarchs which are in CONTRADICTION to ages preserved in the King James Bible which is derived from a Massoretic Text. Please click here to see the difference in ages for the pre-flood patriarchs as preserved in the Septuaginta versus to Massoretic Texts.
The data preserved in modern Jewish text the TANAKH also called the Massoretic Text has creation calculated at 3760 or 3740 B.C. in the Rabbinical Seder 'Olam Rabbah (for 3760 B.C. cf. p. 111. table 54. Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. Revised edition. 1998. for 3740 B.C. cf. below Steibing)
Professor Steibing on three different and _CONTRADICTING_ dates for God's creation of the world in the book of Genesis as calculated by various Jewish, Catholic and Protestant scholars:
"Most scholars agreed that the world was only about six thousand years old, though there was considerable disagreement over the exact date of the creation. Jewish rabbinical calculations from the Hebrew Massoretic Text showed that the world began 3,740 years before the Christian Era. Roman Catholic tradition, based on the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible, placed the creation in 5199 B.C. And most English-speaking Protestants accepted the seventeenth-century Archbishop James Ussher's calculation of the time of creation, 4004 B.C. Ussher's dates were placed in the margins of early eighteenth-century editions of the King James version of the Bible, making them seem even more authoritive."
(p. 32. "The Discovery of Prehistory." William H. Steibing Jr. Uncovering the Past. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1994 [1993 Prometheus Books])
Thus Protestant Christian Evangelicals set the Exodus at circa 1445 BC using Ussher's chronology, the Roman Catholics set the Exodus at circa 1512 BC and the Jewish TANAKH's data which appears in the Rabbinical work called Seder 'Olam Rabbah calculates the Exodus at 1312 BC. For the 1512 BC Exodus date cf. page 190; for 1312 BC cf. p. 111 in Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology: Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 1964, 1998 Revised Edition. ISBN 1-56563-143-9).
The Roman Catholic Exodus date of 1512 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Tuthmoses II (reigned circa 1518-1504 BC); The Protestant Evangelicals' Exodus date from the King James Version of 1445 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Amenhotep II (reigned ca. 1453-1419 BC); the Rabbinical Seder 'Olam Rabah's Exodus date of ca. 1312 BC falls in the reign of Pharaoh Horemhab (reigned ca. 1321-1293 BC), he being succeeded by Ramesses I (reigned ca. 1293-1291 BC). Note all Pharaonic reigns are from Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs, The Reign-by-reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt. London. Thames & Hudson. 1994. ISBN 0-500-05074-0.
Anyone who has studied the chronology issues and problems arising in Biblical as well as Egyptological studies is well aware that a consensus does _not_ exist for any "hard dates" in regards to when the Exodus occured (if it occured) or just when the Hyksos Expulsion happened. For the Exodus we have two major proposals 1445 BCE (based on statements made in 1 Kings 6:1) favored by many Conservative Protestant Scholars, and 1250 BCE championed by numerous Liberals. There are other dates, but they have far fewer adherents.
In 1985 R. Krauss argued that the 9th year of Amenhotep I, noting a rising of the Sothis star, if viewed from Aswan (ancient Elephantine) would indicate that the 18th Dynasty was founded ca. 1539 BCE (Sothis und Monddaten, HAB 20. Hildesheim). Other Scholars have argued the viewing might have been from Thebes, which was then the capital (cf. Vol. 2. p. 329, K. A. Kitchen, "Egypt, History of (Chronology)." David Noel Freedman, Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992). In favor of Aswan, is that the Sothis is associated with predictions of Nile floods, and Aswan has Nilometers to predict the degree of flooding in the Delta. Those favoring a Thebean sighting of Sothis, argue for 1550 BCE being the founding date of the 18th Dynasty.
Some have associated the foundation date of the New Dynasty with the expulsion of the Hyksos from the Delta. Before 1985 (when Krauss made his proposal) earlier dates for the 18th Dynasty's founding were in favor, 1580 or 1570 BCE. Now, 1550 or 1540/39 BCE appear in scholarly articles as founding dates alongside 1570 BCE (its all rather confusing).
Manfred Bietak, the excavator of Tell el-Daba (believed to be the Hyksos capital called Avaris in Egypt), has suggested the city came to end ca. 1530 BCE (emphasis mine):
"An enormous increase in Cypriot pottery...can be observed in strata D/3-2 (ca. 1600-1530 BC)." (p. 85. Manfred Bietak. Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab`a. London. British Museum Press. 1996. ISBN 0-7141-0968-1 pbk).
This date is favored by William G. Dever (emphasis mine):
"Tell el-Dab`a was, in fact the Hyksos capital of Avaris, destroyed ca. 1530 BCE with the expulsion of the Hyksos at the beginning of the 18th Dynasty." (p.71, William G. Dever. "Is There Any Archaeological Evidence For The Exodus?" Ernest S. Frerichs & Leonard H. Lesko. Editors. Exodus, The Egyptian Evidence. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. 1997. ISBN 1-57506-025-6. hdbk).
Bietak posits that Avaris fell in Ahmose's 15th or 18th year as he has the city falling 1530 BCE, he evidently dates Ahmose's first regnal year as circa 1548 or 1545 BCE:
"...Ahmose. He had conquered Avaris most probably after the fifteenth or even eighteenth year of his reign." (p. 81. Bietak, citing in footnote 144, Franke, 1988, p. 264. Manfred Bietak. Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab`a. London. British Museum Press. 1996. ISBN 0-7141-0968-1 pbk)
Kenneth Kitchen and James Hoffmeier favor Ahmose's reign as ca. 1550-1525 BCE (placing the end of the Hyksos dynasty as either 1550 or 1540 BCE), Krauss prefers 1539-1514 BCE for Ahmoses' reign (cf. Vol. 2. p. 329, K.A. Kitchen, "Egypt, History of (Chronology)." David Noel Freedman, Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992).
Of interest here is that Goldstein's reading of chronological data preserved in Judges and Kings leads him to conclude the Exodus is being dated either circa 1447 BCE or circa 1528 BCE; I note Kitchen's lowest date for Ahmose I is 1525 BCE while Krauss' lowest date for Ahmose I is 1514 BCE. Worth noting though, is that Goldstein _never_ makes the observation that 1528 BCE falls within the reign Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos, in fact, he does not attempt to identify what Pharaoh this date aligns with because his major focus is in refuting the notion of an Exodus ca. 1312 BCE as preserved in the Rabbinical Seder Olam Rabbah..
Goldstein (emphasis mine):
"However, things are not so simple. For in fact, beside the summary figure of 480 years from the Exodus to the building of the Jerusalem Temple--which equals 476 years from the Exodus to the enthronement of Solomon-- the Bible provides more detailed chronological data for the same period. The bulk of these data comes from the book of Judges, which lists the alternating periods of alien domination over Israel and independent rule by Israelite judges, with the total length of these periods adding up to at least 410 years. The period bridging between the Exodus and the commencement of the era of the Judges (with the death of Joshua the son of Nun) comprises 40 years of the Israelites' wanderings in the desert prior to the arrival to the eastern bank of the Jordan river (Exodus 16:35, Numbers 14:33-34, 32:13, Deuteronomy 1:3, 2:7, 8:2-4, 29:4) and the leadership of Joshua, which must have lasted at least 5 years. The period bridging the end of the era of the Judges (as described in the book of Judges) and the enthronement of Solomon comprises 40 years of the leadership of Eli (1 Samuel 4:18), 20 years of the people following the Lord under Samuel (1 Samuel 7:2), 2 years of Saul's reign (1 Samuel 13:1), and 40 years of David's reign (2 Samuel 5:4). So, according to these detailed chronological data, the period from the Exodus to the enthronement of Solomon must have spanned at least 40+5+40+20+2+40= 557 years, which would place the Exodus c. 1528 BCE. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 81 years between the two biblical dates for the Exodus, and the later of these dates (1447 BCE) is 135 years earlier than the rabbinic date for the Exodus, based on Seder Olam Rabbah (1312 BCE). These discrepancies should be always kept in mind...the chronological scheme presented in the Bible itself... points to the date of c. 1447 BCE or c. 1528 BCE for the Exodus."
Another complication is disagreement about Solomon's fourth year, when the Temple was begun (1 Kings 6:1 claiming 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to the Temple's founding). Two dates are currently favored for the start of Solomon's reign, 970 or 960 BCE, his reign ending 930 or 920 BCE:
"...chronological notes in the biblical sources, lead scholars to assume the beginning of Solomon's reign around 970-960 and its end around 930-920 BC."
(Vol. 6, p. 105, Tomoo Ishida, "Solomon." David Noel Freedman, Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992)
Utilizing these currently popular dates, Solomon's fourth year is either 966 or 956 BCE.
To recapitulate, prior to 1985, 1580 BCE or 1570 BCE were popular founding dates for the 18th Dynasty under Pharoah Ahmose I. Since the 1985 proposal by Krauss either 1550 or 1540/39 BCE seem to be favored-
My research has revealed that the sacred writings of the Jews and Early Christians preserve a date of 1540 BCE for the Exodus which just happens to match co-incidentally, the 1540 BCE currently held "alternate-end-date" of the Hyksos 15th Dynasty (the Hyksos Expulsion by Paharoh Ahmoses I) favored by Egyptologists Kenneth A. Kitchen and James K. Hoffmeier (cf. p. xviiii, "Chronological Charts." James K. Hoffmeier. Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press. 1996. ISBN 0-19-513088-X pbk).
I note that Amihai Mazar seems to also favor a Hyksos expulsion ca. 1540 BCE (emphasis mine):
"It appears to me that a general division of the entire MBII period into three phases (A, B, C) is well documented on the basis of stratigraphy, pottery typology, and development of other artifacts...the third phase- MBIIC correlates with the Hyksos Fifteenth Dynasty (until 1540)."
(p.195, Amihai Mazar. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000- 586 BCE. New York. Doubleday. 1990. ISBN 0-385-23970-X hdbk.)
We will now explore in greater depth the complexities and contradictions to be faced and overcome in establishing the date of the Exodus.
Hoffmeier, in reviewing a history of attempts to pinpoint the date of the Exodus, mentions the work of Jack (James W. Jack. The Date of the Exodus in the Light of External Evidence. Edinburgh, Scotland. T & T Clark. 1925):
"...James Jack argued for a mid-fifteenth century date based on biblical data and what he believed to corroborating Egyptian evidence. Based on the Masoretic text of 1 Kings 6:1, which dates the departure from Egypt at 480 years before Solomon's fourth regnal year, Jack concluded that 1445 B.C. was the Exodus date since Solomon's acession date, 970 BC could be securely fixed (his fourth year being 966/967), thanks to synchronisms between Biblical and Assyrian texts." (p.124, Hoffmeier)
Hoffmeier noted that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) gives 440 years instead of 480 years. (p.124. James K. Hoffmeier. Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press. 1996. ISBN 0-19-513088-X pbk).
Hoffmeier also observed that Jack was aware that a careful reading of the Masoretic texts revealed an elapsed period exceeding 480 years (emphasis mine):
"However, as Jack showed, if all the periods are added together, such as the forty years in Sinai, the lengths of the Judges, and periods of peace between the Judges, plus the length of David's reign, the total is 534 years. On top of this figure, the duration of Joshua's leadership in Canaan and the length of Saul's kingship, which are not preserved, bring the total close to six hundred years."
(p.125. James K. Hoffmeier. Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press. 1996. ISBN 0-19-513088-X pbk).
According to Professor Mariottini Professor Hoffmeier has suggested 630 or 650 years may have elapsed from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year and the building of the Temple at Jerusalem. By adding these years to 966/967 B.C. (Solomon's 4th year) we arrive at an Exodus date of 1596 or 1616 B.C. when the Hyksos were in power in Egypt.
Mariottini (27 July 2007):
"Prof. Hoffmeier correctly points out that the dates found in the book of Joshua through 1 Kings do not add up to 480 years. Prof. Hoffmeier calculated the number of years for Joshua, the judges and the kings of Israel up to Solomon and the numbers added up to 630-650 years. Those who accept a 15th-century date for the Exodus, have to harmonize the text by presupposing overlaps in the years some of the judges ruled in Israel...Prof. Hoffmeier says that the biblical data would put the Exodus during the Hyksos’ occupation of Egypt."
("The Date of the Exodus." 27 July 2007. Professor Claude Mariottini of Northern Baptist Seminary, Lombard, Illinois.
Gooder (2000) on _more_ than 553 years elapsing between the Exodus and Solomon's fourth year (which, if added to Solomon's 4th year would date the Exodus not later than 1519 B.C., it could have been earlier):
"The fourth year of Solomon's reign is commonly dated to around 966 B.C.E. This would place the Exodus 480 years earlier in 1446 B.C.E. For many years, this date was commonly accepted as correct and has been supported more recently by J.J. Bimson (1978). There are, however, numerous problems with a fifteenth-century date for the exodus and settlement. One of these is that, if the generations betwen the exodus and the fourth year of Solomon's reign are combined, the number of years reached is over 553, not 480. This raises questions about how the ancient biblical writers calculated dates and generations."
(p. 69. "Let My People Go..." Paula Gooder. The Pentateuch, A Story of Beginnings. Continuum International Publishing Group. 2000, reprint 2005)
Romer (1988) on the Hyksos expulsion being the only known "exodus" of Asiatics from Egypt in his discussion of the Hebrew Exodus and its possible attestation in extra-biblical records:
"Theban royal texts tell of their final victories over the northerners in the 1530's B.C....The victory inscriptions of these southern pharaohs tell us they threw these foreigners out of Egypt then pursued them to Canaan and beyond. And this is the only foreign mass-migration, an exodus from ancient Egypt, for which there is any evidence at all in the archaeological records."
(p. 48. John Romer. Testament: The Bible and History. New York. Henry Holt & Company. 1988)
Later scholars, like Jack, have noted that 1 Kings 6:1 states that 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to the fourth year of Solomon's reign and the building of the Temple. Some scholars date Solomon's fourth year to circa 966 BCE, by adding 480 years to this date and come up with an Exodus circa 1446 BCE. Kitchen has sounded a note of warning though about the above equation, pointing out, like Jack, that a period in excess of 553 years appears to be warranted instead of 480 years:
Kitchen (emphasis mine):
"The lazy man's solution is simply to cite the 480 years ostensibly given in 1 Kings 6:1 from the Exodus to the 4th year of Solomon (ca. 966 BC). However, this too simple solution is ruled out by the combined weight of all
the other biblical dadta plus additional information from external data. So the interval of time from the Exodus comes out not at 480 years but as over 553 years (BY THREE UNKNOWN AMOUNTS), if we trouble to go carefully through all the known biblical figures for this period. It is evident that the 480 years cannot cover fully the 553 years + X years. At the best, it could be a selection from them, or else it is a schematic figure (12 x 40 yrs., or similar)."
(p. 702. Vol. 2. K. A. Kitchen. "The Exodus." David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992)
Still later, Kitchen suggested that a period of 591/596 years elapsed between the Exodus and Solomon's 4th year according to chronologies preserved in the book of Judges, that is, when the different reigns are added up sequentially, but he favors that some of the reigns are concurrent not sequential (emphasis mine):
"This possibility becomes in effect a certainty if one goes through the date lines between the Exodus and the fourth year of Solomon, the year he began to build his temple, "in the 480th year" since the Exodus (1 Kings 6:1), we are told. Thus, if that year fell circa 967 (cf. dates in chapters 2 and 4 above), a literal adding up would set the Exodus in 1447. But if we take the trouble to actually tote up all the individual figures known from Exodus to Kings in that period, they do NOT add up to 480 years. But rather to 544+x+y+z years, where x= unknown length by Joshua and the elders (minimum, 5/10 years ?), y= rule by Samuel above his stated 20 years (possibly zero), and z= the full reign of Saul (minimum, [3]2 years). The total comes to between 35 and 42 years at least, bringing the 554 years to a minimal 591/596 years. This is certainly not identical with the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1."
(pp. 202-203. Kenneth Andrew Kitchen. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003)
If we add Hoffmeier's 600 years and Kitchen's 591/596 years to Solomon's 967 BC we come up with an Exodus date ca. 1567 BC, and 1558/1563 BC. Pharaoh Ahmose I who _expelled the Hyksos_ is dated by Clayton ca. 1570-1546 BC (p. 100. "Ahmose I." Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs. London. Thames & Hudson. 1994). Thus using the "findings" of Kitchen and Hoffmeier regarding 1 Kings 6:1, an Exodus in the days of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos is indeed possible. However, neither of these men understand the Exodus is the Hyksos expulsion, they opt for a Rameside Exodus despite the research they did on 1 Kings 6:1 revealing that the Bible preserves an earlier date for the Exodus. A note of interest: I am unaware of either Hoffmeier or Kitchen stating that the earlier dates for the Exodus that they found in Judges and Kings align the event with Ahmose I's reign and the Hyksos. After identifying the earler date they dismiss it as they are both committed to a Ramesside Exodus. The same failure to align the earlier Exodus date with Ahmose I's reign also holds for Goldstein (cf. above).
Note: Because Professor Kitchen prefers to see some of the reigns in the book of Judges as not sequential but concurrent and thus "lowering the interval of time" between the Exodus and Solomon's 4th year, he NEVER makes the observation that Solomon's 4th year of ca. 967 BCE + 591/596 years = an Exodus ca. 1558/1563 BCE, falling in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I (ca. 1570-1546 BCE, cf. Clayton's 1994 Egyptian Chronology) who expelled the Hyksos (the first century CE Jewish historian Flavius Josephus claiming that the Hyksos expulsion is the Exodus).
Another scholar, De Vries, had made earlier, similar observations about 1 Kings 6:1(emphasis mine):
"It should be pointed out, moreover, that the chronology demanded by the books of the Judges and Samuel actually far exceeds the figure of 480 years. As will be seen from Table 3, a total of 554 years plus two periods of unknown length occupy the interval from the Exodus to the founding of Solomon's temple. Josephus evidently based his estimate of 592 (Antiq. 8.3.1) or 612 (Apion 2.2) years for this period upon this observation (cf. Acts 13:18-21)."
(p. 584. Vol.1. S. J. De Vries. "Chronology of the Old Testament." G. A.Buttrick. Editor. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Nashville. Abingdon Press. 1962)
De Vries noted two periods of unaccounted length, the period of Joshua and the Elders (Judg. 2:7) and the length of King Saul's reign, noting a "full number" was lacking ( 1 Sam. 13:1). He renders these two anomalies as "X"
and "Y" in his formula thusly:
554 yrs. + X + Y + 966 BCE (Solomon's 4th yr) = 1520 BCE and "EARLIER" for the Exodus.
De Vries, in passing, alluded to another important "dating marker" but did not directly employ it in his article, the historical schema preserved in Acts 13:18-21 which provides us with the length of Saul's reign, 40 YEARS, missing from De Vries' "Table 3", equation "Y" and the missing data on Joshua and the Judges, equation "X":
Acts 13:18-21 RSV
"And for about FORTY YEARS he bore with them in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he gave them their land as an inheritance, for about FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS. And after that he gave them judges until Samuel the prophet. Then they asked for a king; and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for FORTY YEARS. And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king..."
(Revised Standard Version. Bruce M. Metzger & Herbert G. May, editors. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977)
The above verse suggests that after 40 years wandering by Israel under Moses, Israel is in possession of the Promised land for 450 years, THEN Judges are given to Israel. THEN Saul rules for 40 years. According to 1 Kings 2:10-11, David reigned 40 years. And the The Temple was built in Solomon's fourth year. Thus we have 40+450+40+40+4= 574 years elapsing from the Exodus to Solomon's fourth year CONTRA 1 Kings 6:1 statement that 480 years elapsed. Solomon's 4th year being fixed by some scholars as 966/967 BCE + 574 years= 1540/1541 in the days of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos.
Lamsa's English translation of the Aramaic Bible renders Acts 13:17-22 thusly, suggesting 450 years elapsed under the Judges:
"The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers and exalted and multiplied them when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with a strong arm he brought them out of it. And hed fed them in the wilderness for forty years, And he destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, and he gave them their land for an inheritance. And for a period of four hundred and fifty years he gave them judges until the time of the prophet Samuel. Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for a period of forty years. And when in time God took Saul away he raised up to them David to be their king..."
(George M. Lamsa. Translation of the Aramaic Text of the Peshitta. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text. Harper & Row San Francisco. [1933], 1968)
Doig (1990), using chronological data in the books of Judges and Kings (as well as Acts 13:16-22) argues that 585 years elapsed from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year (Which is for him 968 BCE). Thus for Doig the 1552 BCE Exodus falls in reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos (Kenneth F. Doig. "The 1552 Exodus." Published in The Journal Catastrophism and Ancient History. Los Angeles. July 1990. pp. 147-157). http://doig.net/OT_Chronology.htm
Till (1990), independently of myself, also surmised 574 years elapsed from the Exodus to Solomon's 4th year as preserved in Acts 13:16-22 contra 1 Kings 6:1's 480 years. He also wrestled with the text in that it suggested to him that after having been in Canaan for 450 years God gave Israel Judges, but he noted that the text neglects to say how long the Judges reigned. Till, citing other scholars' research suggested they reigned for not less than 250 years. Till did _not_ attempt to identify which Pharaoh reigned at the time of an Exodus possessing 574 years instead of 480 years elapsing. I note that 574 + 966 (Solomon's 4th year) = 1540 BCE, falling in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos.
Till:
"Is the Bible the work of perfect harmony that inerrancy believers claim it is? Suppose we let the Bible speak for itself and see what answer we get. I Kings 6:1 says that work on the temple began 480 years after the exodus from Egypt: "And it came to pass in the _four_hundred_and eightieth_year_ after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of Jehovah (Yahweh)." But the Apostle Paul made a speech in Antioch of Pisidia in which his math contradicted this statement: "The God of this people Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they sojourned in the land of Egypt, and with a high arm led he them forth out of it. And for about the time of _forty_years_ as a nursing-father bare he them in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he gave them their land for an inheritance, for about _four hundred_and_fifty_years_: and after these things he gave them judges until Samuel the prophet. And afterward they asked for a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for the space of _forty_years_. And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king; to whom also he bare witness and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after my heart, who shall do all my will," (Acts 13:17-22).
With nothing else considered, the 40 years in the wilderness and the 450 years that the Israelites had the land of Canaan for an inheritance before the advent of the judges total 10 years more than the 480 years of I Kings 6:1. _Eerdmans_Bible_Dictionary_ states that the period of the judges "could not reasonably be reduced to less than 280 years," (p. 610). Saul, as Paul noted, reigned as king for 40 years, as did also David who succeeded him (I Kings 2:11). So if we add the four years that Solomon reigned before work on the temple began, we have 40 + 450 + 280 + 40 + 40 + 4, for a total of 854, a significant variation from the 480 years claimed in I Kings 6:1. Even if we let Paul's 450 years for the inheritance of Canaan include also the advent of the judges, as some translations strain to do, his chronology will still total 574 years, almost a century longer than what was claimed in I Kings 6:1."
Dr. Meyers on Acts' 450 years being assigned to Judges:
"Acts 13:20 clearly states that the time period of the judges was 450 years. There are some textual problems with where to place the 450 years. Some scholars say because of the Alexandrian text it is the total of the time in Egypt plus the 40 years in the wilderness plus 10 years for Joshua to conquer Canaan, but no ancient writer that we have looked at takes this view. The years in Egypt were not 400, and the time for Joshua is much longer about 25 years. Jackson and Lake state, "The Western and Antiochian texts and the majority of the modern editors think the 450 ought to refer to the period of the judges" (1979, 150). Ropes explains that the variations were probably intended to prevent the reader from misinterpreting the 450 years as the time being spent to conquer Canaan (Barrett 1994, 633; Courville 1971, 7). The 450 years seems to be the addition of all the judges including Eli (339 years) and the years of oppression (111 years; Lightfoot 1979, Vol 4, 118; See Table 8). Josephus seems to follow this addition as well as most of the other ancient Jewish writers and Church Fathers."
"All of the early church fathers stated that the exodus was more than 480 years from the founding of Solomon's Temple, except Eusebius. Others said 595 years from Solomon's Temple placing the exodus around 1561 BC All except Eusebius say Ahmose is the Pharaoh of the exodus who expelled the Hyksos from Egypt (Manetho 1940, 115; See Tables 5-7)."
Professor Witherington prefers the 450 years to refer to 400 years in Egypt, 40 years wanderings, 10 years to conquer Canaan:
"Verse 19 continues the positive theme, indicating that God cleared the land of Canaan of seven nations (cf. Deut. 7:1) in order to give Israel its inheritance "for about 450 years." This would seem to be arrived at by adding 400 years in Egypt to the 40 in the wilderness and another 10 for the conquest of the land."
(p. 410. Ben Witherington. The Acts of the Apostles, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans. 1998)
In a footnote Witherington acknowledges that some texts clearly identify the 450 years as the period of the Judges but rejects these texts as being "clearly inferior":
"The Western text is clearly inferior here, suggesting that there were judges for 450 years! See Beginnings, 4:150-51, but cf. Rope's views in Beginnings, 3:121." (note 211. p. 410. Witherington)
We have an interesting dilemma here for Conservative Christian Apologists who claim the Bible is inerrant and is to be trusted. Which Bible do we believe? The Aramaic Peshitta's text of Acts 13:17-22 suggesting Israel is ruled by Judges for 450 years or the RSV claiming 450 years elapsed before the Judges came to power? Both texts can't be right. Which text do we believe on how long Saul reigned, 1 Samuel 13:1 or Acts 13:21? If the Holy Texts are inerrant how to explain the "missing data" on Saul's reign WHICH IS PRESERVED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT?
1 Samuel 12:25; 13:1-2 RSV
""But if you still do wickednes, you shall be swept away, both you and your king. Saul was...years old when he began to reign; and he reigned...and two years over Israel. Saul chose three thousand men...
The Septuaginta omits 1 Samuel 13:1 and its data about Saul altogether:
"But if ye continue to do evil, then shall ye and your king be consumed. And Saul chooses for himself three thousand men..."
(p. 371. 1 Kings 12:25- 13:2. Lancelot C. L. Brenton. The Septuagint With Apocrypha: Greek and English. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. Reprint of 1851 edition published by Samuel Bagster & Sons Ltd., London)
Acts 13:21 RSV
""And for about FORTY YEARS he bore with them in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he gave them their land as an inheritance, for about FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY YEARS. And _after that he gave them judges_ until Samuel the prophet.Then they asked for a king; and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for FORTY YEARS."
Acts 13:21 then CONTRADICTS 1 Kings 6:1 which avers 480 years elapsed between the Exodus and Solomon's 4th year in that it has 574 years elapsing. Which text does one believe, Kings or Acts, they both can't be right?
The Septuagint's rendering of 1 Kings 6:1 also CONTRADICTS the Massoretic Text's 480 years, for it has 440 years elapsing:
"And it came to pass in the FOUR HUNDRED AND FORTIETH YEAR after the departure of the children of Israel out of Egypt, in the FOURTH YEAR and second month of the reign of king Solomon over Israel..."
(p. 450. 3 Kings 6:18. Lancelot C. L. Brenton. The Septuagint With Apocrypha: Greek and English. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. Reprint of 1851 edition published by Samuel Bagster & Sons Ltd., London)
Of course, the Apologists have an answer. Only the original texts called "autographs" were inerrant but they no longer exist (How handy- we have no original texts to know what God "really" said). Later texts, over hundreds of years became riddled with man-made scribal errors and emendations. The problem with this rationale or "apologia"? It recognizes that God or his Holy Spirit were _unable_ to keep the Holy Texts error-free. Satan "the father of error" _has triumphed over God and the Holy Spirit_ by introducing to the Holy Texts man-made errors. How do we distinguish a text written by Satan as opposed by one written by God? Simple. Because Satan is the "father of error," he is incapable of composing a text that is error-free. Error is his hallmark. God on the otherhand is all-knowing and makes no error. So his compositions "ought to" stand out from Satan's by being error-free. But this is not the case with the Bible. ALL biblical recensions are riddled with errors, revealing they are not God's work, but Satan's doing. Because I do not recognize the Bible to be God's word, I also am sceptical of all its chronological data. Please click here for my article explaining why the Bible cannot be God's word.
Another "observation" is neccesary, just how reliable is the chronology in the Bible? One must admit that the following numbers which possess a "4" seem rather "odd," or "fishy" as if the compilers are "playing with" this number:
4004 BCE the Creation of the earth (Ussher's calculation appearing in some King James Version Bibles).
430 years in Egypt for Israel (Exodus 12:40)
400 years bondage in Egypt (Genesis 15:13)
40 years wanderings in Wilderness (Acts 13:16-22)
480 years Exodus to Temple's Building at Jerusalem (1 Kings 6:1 Massoretic Text)
440 years Exodus to Temple's Building at Jerusalem (1 Kings 6:1 Septuaginta Text)
450 years Judges rule in Israel (Acts 13:16-22, Aramaic Peshitta Text)
40 years Saul rules (Acts 13:16-22)
40 years David rules (1 Kings 2:10-11)
4 years of Solomon's rule then Temple built (1 Kings 6:1)
Yet, when the above data is added up the Exodus date falls in the reign of Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos.
The above statement is suppossedly from Paul, who claimed to possess Jewish priestly training and knowledge. Evidently there existed in Paul's times Jewish notions of a chronology at variance with 1 Kings 6:1 and its 480
years.
I note that according to 1 Kings 2:10-11, David reigned 40 years:
"So David rested with his forefathers and was buried in the city of David, having reigned over Israel for forty years..."
We are told that in the fourth year of Solomon the Temple was begun (1 Kings 6:1).
So, when we add up the totals from Acts 13:18-21, 1 Kings 2:10-11, and 1 Kings 6:1 we have 40 yrs in the Wilderness, 450 years to Saul, 40 yrs for Saul's reign, 40 yrs for David's reign, 4 yrs for Solomon and the temple, for a grand total of 574 years between the Exodus and the Temple's founding. Add this to 966 BCE when the Temple was begun, and we have 1540 BCE for the Exodus date, on the "testimony of the sacred writings" of the Jews and Early Christians.
Although the above establishes a "possible" Exodus date of ca. 1540 BCE and connects this date with the Hyksos Expulsion, there are other dates which need to be considered.
Josephus gives two different number of years for the period between the Exodus and the Temple of Solomon (ca. 966 BCE), 592 years (Antiquities 8.3.1) or 612 years (Against Apion 2.2). When these dates are added, 612 + 966 = 1578 BCE whereas 592 + 966= 1558 BCE.
So, we have for possible Exodus dates: 1519+ (Gooder), 1520+ (De Vries), 1528+ (Goldstein), 1540 (Mattfeld & Till), 1552 (Doig), 1558+ (Josephus & Kitchen), 1563+ (Kitchen), 1567+ (Hoffmeier), 1578 BCE (Josephus).
Another problem in establishing a date for the Exodus is that Egyptologists are not in agreement amongst themselves about the dates for the reign of Pharaoh Ahmoses I (rendered by various scholars as Ahmes/Ahmosis/Ahmoses/Ahmose) who expelled the Hyksos.
In Albright's article, he alludes to Parker preferring 1557-1532 BCE, while Helck prefers 1552-1527 BCE (Cf. p. 56, William F. Albright. "Some Remarks on the Archaeological Chronology of Palestine before about 1500 B.C." in Robert W. Ehrich. Editor. Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. Chicago. The University of Chicago Press. 1954, 1965, reprint 1971. ISBN 0-226-19443-4).
Other dates are championed for Ahmoses I reign: James Breasted (1912. A History of Egypt) argues for 1580-1557 BCE. Alan Gardiner prefers 1575-1550 BCE (p. 443. Egypt of the Pharaohs, Oxford University Press. 1961); Krauss favors 1539-1514 BCE.
So, we have dates ranging from 1580 to 1514 BCE for Ahmose's reign depending upon the authority being cited, Egyptologists sometimes refer to these varying theories under the term of "High, Middle and Low Egyptian Chronologies." Into Ahmose's varying regnal dates, 1580 to 1514 BCE we can "plug-in" varying Exodus dates ranging from 1578 to 1519+ BCE.
Acts 13:18-21 in conjunction with 1 Kings 2:10-11 and 1 Kings 6:1, gives an Exodus in 1540 BCE, Josephus provides us with 1558 BCE or 1578 BCE all of which fall within the 1580 to 1514 BCE dating range for Pharaoh Ahmose I's reign.
I have attempted to argue that a careful reading of the internal chronology of the Hebrew Bible when combined with, evidently, 1st century CE Jewish traditions preserved by the Early Christians (Acts 13:18-21), pinpoint the Exodus as being a phenomena of the mid-16th century BCE, the same century that witnessed the Hyksos Expulsion.
How does one account for Jewish traditions preserving a chronology placing the Exodus in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I (also rendered Ahmes, Ahmose, Ahmosis, Ahmoses) who expelled the Hyksos?
I suspect that the Expulsion of the Hyksos and the conquest of Canaan by Ahmose and his successors was such a traumatic event, that this date became a "cornerstone" marker for subsequent histories or chronologies. Canaan after 1540 BCE became the vassal of Egypt, subject to tribute, and her peoples were hauled off to Egypt to serve as slaves building the mighty monuments of the glorious New Kingdom Era. Evidently later generations broke up this block of time (from 1540 BCE) into artifical segments, 4th year (Solomon's building of the Temple), 40 years (David's reign), 40 years (Saul's reign), 40 years (Wanderings), 480 years (1 Kings 6:1), perhaps due to some kind of religious fascination with "numerical mysticism" ?
It is my understanding that the fictionalized Pentateuchal narratives have creatively re-interpreted, transformed and modified the Hyksos Expulsion into a new story, "the Exodus," telling how a merciful God saved his people and brought them to their Promised Land.
If the above suppositions are correct, it follows that Israel was not in bondage for 400+ years in Egypt, that is fiction. The Hyksos ruled Egypt for approximately 200 years until defeated and expelled. They fled along the Way of the Philistines, back to Canaan with the Egyptians in pursuit. There was no crossing of the Red Sea, or journey to Mt. Sinai (Horeb) or invasion of Canaan from Trans-Jordan in the 16th century BCE.
Excavations at Heshbon reveal it didn't exist before 1200 BCE, which doesn't surprise me as I hold the account to be fictional of the war with Sihon the Amorite. The excavations of course, serve as a marker that the Pentateuchal account was written some time after 1200 BCE and the settlement of Heshbon.
I understand that Liberal scholars rejected the Pentateuch's 1540 BCE or 1446 BCE dating schema because they believed that the mention of the town of "Ramses" in the Exodus account (Ex. 12:37) must be a "historical marker," dating the event to the reign of Rameses II 1290-1224 BCE) who founded Per-Rameses, which they believed was the biblical Ramses. The presence of the town Ramses was a "marker" allright, a marker that the text was composed after 1290-1224 BCE, not that the Exodus event must be in the 13th century BCE!
Redford's investigations led him to conclude there was one event only in the whole of Egyptian history that could account for a "historical kernal" behind the Exodus and that was the Hyksos expulsion under Pharaoh Ahmoses I and I concur with his analysis:
"Despite the lateness and unreliability of the story in Exodus, no one can deny that the tradition of Israel's coming out of Egypt was one of long standing. It is found in early poetry (e.g., Exodus 15) and is constantly alluded to by the prophets...There is only one chain of historical events that can accomodate this late tradition, that is the Hyksos descent and occupation of Egypt...And in fact it is in the Exodus account that we are confronted with the Canaanite version of this event...we may say that the memory of the Hyksos expulsion did indeed live on in the folklore of the Canaanite population of the southern Levant. The exact details were understandably blurred and subconsciously modified over time, for the purpose of "face-saving." It became not a conquest but a peaceful descent of a group with pastoral associations who rapidly arrived at a position of political control. Their departure came not as a result of ignominious defeat, but either voluntarily or as a flight from a feud, or yet again as salvation from bondage."
(pp. 412-413. Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton University Press. 1992)
Redford suggested that certain elements or motifs in the Exodus were drawing not only from the Hyksos era but the Amarna and Ramesside Eras as well, he noting that Manetho had identified the Israelite Exodus with events that seemed to align with Pharaohs Akhetaton through Rameses II. Osarsiph was identified with Moses by Manetho:
"From what has been adduced to this point it is clear that the first half of Manetho's Osarseph tradition (the "A" pattern) descends from an etiological tale bearing on the Amarna period of Egyptian history. The story probably originally concluded with the 19th Dynasty kings Sety I (Merneptah) and his son Ramesses II finally putting and end to the Amarna interlude; thus it would conform to the revised king list of later Ramesside times, in which the four "Amarna" reigns are excised and their years added to Horemheb, so that the 19th Dynasty follows Amenhotep III immediately...The fate of the victims in the Osarseph legend differs from that of the Hyksos. The latter were expelled through war, whereas the lepers were enslaved. It is from Osarsiph or its prototype that the "Bondage" tradition of Exodus originated."
(p. 416. Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton University Press. 1992)
Redford on the Hebrew's adopting the Canaanite folk memories after settling the land:
"It is ironic that the Sojourn and the Exodus themes, native in origin to the folklore memory of the Canaanite enclaves of the southern Levant, should have lived on not in that tradition but among two groups that had no involvement in the historic events at all -the Greeks and the Hebrews. In the case of the latter, the Exodus was part and parcel of an array of "origin" stories to which the Hebrews fell heir upon their settlement of the land, and which, lacking traditions of their own, they appropriated from the earlier culture they were copying."
(p. 422. Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton University Press. 1992)
Redford also suggested that the geography of Egypt as portrayed in the Old Testament, was that of Saitic Egypt, the 7th through 6th centuries BCE, surmising that the text had been written either in the Exilic or Post-Exilic period:
" We cannot escape the conclusion that the narrative genealogy, like the tabular, reflects a sixth to fifth century placement of peoples and states. It is essentially the view of the world that the Jews carried with them into Exile, slightly modified by their descendants who returned to their native land three or four generations later...Whoever supplied the geographical information that now adorns the story had no information earlier than the Saite period (seventh to sixth centuries B.C.). The eastern Delta and Sinai he describes are those of the 26th Dynasty kings and the early Persian overlords...In short, with respect to geography of the Exodus, the Post-Exilic compiler of the present Biblical version had no genuinely ancient details. He felt constrained to supply them from the Egypt of his own day and significantly perhaps, cited several places where Asiatic elements and especially Judaean mercenaries resided in the sixth and fifth centuries."
(pp. 407-410. Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, Princeton University Press. 1992)
For my own part, I would disagree with Redford about the Primary History, Genesis-Kings, being Post-Exilic in its final version. I have argued it was composed in the Exile, circa 560 BCE. Please click here for my arguments.
Hoffmeier, who argues for a Ramesside Exodus in the days of Rameses II, rejected Redford's above analysis:
"I cannot disagree with any one of these points, except that Redford thinks these events derived from the Hyksos experience in Egypt- their migration, period of dominance, followed by their forced exodus. For him a particular group of Shasu (Bedouin) who lived in Sinai and the Negev are the forebearers of Israel. This tribe embraced the story of the exodus as their own. The problem with this interpretation, like that of Halpern, is that the Israelites recall little or nothing of their own origin but know about the Hyksos from a thousand years before. The essentials of the Hyksos story are recalled, Redford speculates, and then they were combined with Persian-period data from Egypt to create the biblical narratives. I find this model to explain how the story of Genesis 39 to Exodus 14 was formed requires a greater leap of faith than to believe the narratives are historical in nature and were preserved by Hebrew scribes, beginning toward the end of the Late Bronze Age."
(p. 226. "Concluding Remarks." James K. Hoffmeier. Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press. 1996)
Assman (an Egyptologist at Heidelberg University in Germany) suggested, like Redford, that the Israelite Exodus was a conflation and recasting (via inversions) of several events, the Hyksos Expulsion and the Amarna Era when Pharaoh Akhenaten attempted to promote the worship of only _one god_ the Aten/Aton (Emphasis mine):
"Freud's ingenious observation links up perfectly well with the relationship between the biblical account of the Exodus and what was to be considered the historical evidence for it. The historical evidence for a longer sojourn of Syro-Palestinian Semites in Egypt IS THE HYKSOS OCCUPATION, when the foreign invaders reigned as kings over Egypt, eventually to be expelled by an Egyptian dynasty. These events came by NARRATIVE INVERSION to be shaped into the story of slaves that were able to escape slavery and were elected by God to become a people and even have kings of their own."
(p.150. Jan Assmann. Moses the Egyptian, The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard University Press. 1997)
Assmann on the Aten's influence on Judaism (Emphasis mine):
"Whereas the Heliopolitan priests worshipped the sun god as the highest god and creator of all, Akhenaten proclaimed him to be the ONE and ONLY god: 'YOU SOLE GOD BESIDE WHOM THERE IS NO OTHER.' There is only one possible conclusion to draw: If Moses was an Egyptian and if he communicated his religion to the Jews, IT MUST HAVE BEEN AKHENATEN'S the ATEN RELIGION."
p. 153. Jan Assmann. Moses the Egyptian, The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard University Press. 1997)
Assman seems to suggest that the Sun-god, the Aten (Aton) was transformed into, or assimilated with Yahweh. Of interest here is a verse metaphorically speaking of Yahweh RISING AND SHINING in the East from Seir (somewhat like the sun rises and shines in the east) to lead his people from Egypt, eastwards to Mount Sinai and the Promised land:
Deuteronomy 33:1-2 RSV
"This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. He said, "The Lord came from Sinai, and DAWNED from Se'ir upon us, he SHONE FORTH from Mount Paran..."
Some scholars understand Seir is the mountainous region on the east side of the Arabah valley extending from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba. I note that this mountian range terminates at Gebel Faranj near the port of Aqaba. Is Gebel Faranji Mount Paran? The above verse suggests for me that as Israel breaks camp each morning she takes her bearings by waiting for the sunrise which leads them ever eastwards from Egypt to Mount Sinai and to Seir and Mount Paran (Gebel Faranji?). The sun is then metaphorically likened to being Yahweh rising and shining in the east, leading his people from Egypt to the Promised Land.
Solomon's fourth year utilizing the currently favored first year of 970 or 960 BCE, is either 966 or 956 BCE (Vol. 6, p. 105, Tomoo Ishida. "Solomon." David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992).
The current proposals for the Hyksos Expulsion are 1550 or 1540/39 BCE (Kitchen and Hoffmeier) or as late as 1530 BCE (Bietak and Dever). My "discovery" of 574 years elapsing between the Exodus and Solomon's fourth year (Acts 13:18-21, 1 Kings 2:10-11, 1 kings 6:1), gives the following *possiblilities* for an Exodus date:
966 BCE + 574 yrs = 1540 BCE, or 956 BCE + 574 yrs = 1530 BCE.
The above data may suggest to viewers that the Exodus Date has been established as being either 1540 or 1530 BCE, aligning with the Hyksos Expulsion. I must add a note of caution, in reality, it is _impossible_ to fix a "single date" for the Exodus.
Why?
Because the Exodus as presented in the Hebrew Bible is a conflating, telescoping, and fusing of events from differing eras, the Early Bronze Age (ca. 2300 BCE) to the end of Iron IIC times (640-560 BCE).
So, it would perhaps be better if I said, that although some internal chronologies of the OT and NT align the Exodus with ca. the mid-16th century BCE and the Hyksos Expulsion, there are events within the biblical scenarios surrounding the Exodus that are from Ramesside Times (13th-12 centuries BCE) as well as the END of Iron Age II (ca. 640-560 BCE), the ONLY period when "MOST" of the sites mentioned in the Exodus narratives, are in existence and occupied at the same time, as noted by Professor Burton MacDonald (cf. my article on Exodus Memories of the Southern Sinai, Linking the Archaeological Evidence to the Biblical Narratives for the details).
That is to say the Exodus' world is that of Iron Age IIC, a world familiar to the author's audience of 640-560 BCE. This world has been projected into the Late Bronze Age (1580-1200 BCE), a time when most of the sites did not exist or if they did exist, they were deserted and unoccupied. That is to say the Exodus is a fictional story. The sites were not in existence for Moses or Joshua to destroy and overcome in the Late Bronze Age; the majority of them existed and were occupied only in Iron IIC times (640-560 BCE).
One of the "mysteries" of the Exodus narratives is the assertion that Israel's Hebrew forefathers served in an Egyptian bondage lasting approximately 400 or 430 years (Genesis 15:13; Exodus 12:40). Scholars understand that the Hyksos, in Egypt, were never under Egyptian domination in Egypt for 400 years, they were expelled after ruling for approximately 200 years, according to the Egyptian historian Manetho, who wrote an account of Egypt's history in the 3rd century BCE, preserved in part by the Jewish historian called Josephus (ca. 80 CE).
I suspect, however, that the 400+ years oppression by Egypt is recalling a real event, a "historical kernel," if you will, that event is the 400+ year oppression of Canaan by the Egyptians from ca. 1540/1530 BCE and the Hysksos Expulsion by Pharaoh Ahmose I to the withdrawal from Canaan ca. 1140/1130 BCE under Ramesses VI.. During this 400+ year oppression, the Egyptian annals of the warrior Pharaohs make mention of `Apiru whom they have defeated in Syria-Palestine, and who have been brought to Egypt as slaves to build the mighty monuments and store cities of the glorious New Kingdom. I suspect that the `Apiru/Habiru of the New Kingdom annals are the "historical kernel" behind the Hebrews being enslaved 400 years by Egypt. So, via an INVERSION, the 400+ year oppression of `Apiru in Canaan by Egyptians, along with `Apiru as slaves in Egypt, became "Hebrews" oppressed in Egypt.
Scholars understand that Egypt withdrew from the Sinai and Canaan ca. 1140/1130 BCE under Pharaoh Ramesses VI. The resulting politcal vaccum in this area permitted the rise of new states, Philista, Israel, Ammon, Moab and Edom in the Iron I era.
Nakhai (emphasis mine):
"Once again, a statue of an Egyptian monarch (in this case, the mid-twelfth century king Ramesses VI) stood in the Megiddo sanctuary (Singer 1988/80; 106-8, n.12; Ussishkin 1997b:464)...When Megiddo's traditional configuration of royal, sacred and secular architecture was destroyed ca. 1130 BCE, ending centuries of Egyptian domination at Megiddo and in Canaan (Ussishkin 1997b: 464), it was soon replaced by the poorly constructed houses of the Israelite Iron Age. Like Beth Shean (see below), Megiddo was continuously occupied by Egypt throughout the Late Bronze Age and into the Iron Age."
(p.135. "The Late Bronze Age." Beth Alpert Nakhai. Archaeology and the Religions of Canaan and Israel. Boston, Mass. American Schools of Oriental Research. 2001)
The Bible is adamant that the promise to Abraham had a "PRECONDITION FROM GOD," that Israel or the Hebrews would FIRST serve 400 (Ge 15:13) or 430 years (Ex 12:40) in an Egyptian bondage, ONLY then, would God intervene and break Egypt's resolve and power allowing his people to "take by conquest" the Promised Land of Canaan. Most scholars understand the rise of Israel occured AFTER Egypt withdrew ca. 1140/1130 BCE, and that Iron I is the settling of the Hill Country with hundreds of unfortified villages and hamlets. If we add 400 or 430 years of bondage to the ca. 1140/1130 BCE date that Egypt left the scene, and the rise of Israel began, we arrive at a bondage date of ca. 1540/1530 or 1570/1560 BCE, falling in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos and who enslaved ALL of Canaan to the Euphrates, including the `Apiru occupants of the land, some of whom later Pharaohs captured and took into captivity, to Egypt. I am arguing that the 400+ year bondage is of Canaan, not Hebrews in Egypt, although there is a corollary in that `Apiru are slaves in Egypt during this period. So it is my understanding that VIA AN INVERSION, the 400+ year bondage of Canaan became a bondage in Egypt.
Redmount, in her article on the Exodus, noted that some scholars associated the Hyksos expulsion of the 16th century BCE with the Exodus. She noted a problem though, in that a period of roughly some 400+ years would have elapsed between the rise of the Monarchy under Saul, David, and Solomon, and the Hyksos Expulsion. What Redmount is apparently unaware of is that the New Testament book of Acts understands that a period of 400+ (450 years according to Acts 13:17-21) years elapsed from the Exodus to Saul's being made Israel's first king.
Redmount (Emphasis mine):
"The hypothesis dating the Exodus to the mid-sixteenth century BCE puts paramount importance on historical data and relies least on biblical narrative. Since the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt is the only recorded historical occurence of a collective movement of Asiatics out of Egypt prior to the first millennium, it is also the only occurence that could be equated with the Exodus. A date at the beginning of the New Kingdom is only about a century earlier than that mandated by strict biblical chronology. Moreover, the ousting of the Hyksos follows an equally historical Asiatic descent into and sojourn in Egypt. Accordingly, as Josephus suggested nearly two thousand years ago (Against Apion 1.16), the Exodus should be equated with the Hyksos' expulsion from Egypt. Destruction levels in Palestinian sites dating to the transition period between the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, often attributed to Egyptian military campaigns, could, according to this view, have resulted from an Israelite conquest and settlement of Cannan.
There are, however, a number of problems with this date for the Exodus. If the Conquest/Settlement occurred at the end of the 16th or beginning of the 15th century BCE, almost 400 years must elapse before the Israelite state takes form under the monarchies of Saul and David at the end of the 11th and beginning of the 10th centuries. Besides being too long a time span for the period of the Judges, the putative 400 years between conquest and kingship would occur during a period of known Egyptian hegemony over Syria-Palestine. Yet not a hint of Egyptian imperial might appears anywhere in the relevant biblical narrative."
(pp.104-105. Carol A. Redmount. "Bitter Lives, Israel in and out of Egypt." Michael D. Coogan, Editor. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. New York and Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1998)
The book of Acts "mirrors" Redmount's above observation of 400+ years elapsing for the Judges before Saul's kingship. Lamsa's English translation of the Aramaic bible renders Acts 13:17-22 thusly:
"The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers and exalted and multiplied them when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with a strong arm he brought them out of it. And hed fed them in the wilderness for forty years, And he destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, and he gave them their land for an inheritance. And for a period of four hundred and fifty years he gave them judges until the time of the prophet Samuel. Then they asked for a king, and God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for a period of forty years. And when in time God took Saul away he raised up to them David to be their king..."
(George M. Lamsa. Translation of the Aramaic Text of the Peshitta. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text. Harper & Row San Francisco. [1933], 1968)
Jephthah the Gileadite, alludes to Israel's dwelling in Heshbon for over 300 years, which is probably being factored in on Acts 13:17-22, notion of 450 years for the Judges:
Judges 11:26 (RSV)
"While Israel dwelt in Heshbon and its villages, and in Aroer and its villages,and in all the cities that are on the banks of the Arnon, three hundred years, why did you not recover them within that time ?"
It is my understanding that the Bible's 400+ year "iniquity of the Amorites" or "oppression of Hebrews" is preserving a real historical event, New Kingdom Egypt's 400+ years oppression of Syria-Palestine (ca. 1540/1530-1140/1130 BCE).
The biblical narrator understands that God has set a "precondition" to the Abrahamic promise, a 400/430 year wait before Israel claims the land. God will FIRST BREAK EGYPT"S POWER, setting free his people. THEN, after breaking Egypt's power, Israel is to settle the Promised Land. Mainstream scholars, understand that Egypt's POWER REMAINED UNBROKEN until ca. 1140 BCE when under the reign of Phraoh Ramesses VI, Egypt withdrew from Canaan and the Sinai. As CORRECTLY observed by Redmount, the Bible KNOWS NOTHING of Israel fighting Egyptians for control of Canaan, Israel fights Amorites, Hittites, Canaanites and Philistines, NOT Egyptians. The ONLY "historical setting" for Israel to begin the Conquest of Canaan, without Egyptian interference is AFTER 1140-1130 BCE when Ramesses VI withdraws from Canaan. Now, lets add the 400/430+ MANDATORY WAIT of the Bible, for the end of the "Amorite iniquity" and we have 1140/1130 BCE plus 430/400 years, which suggests an Exodus in 1570/1540/1530 BCE, aligning with the Hyksos expulsion.
The American scholar, Professor William Foxwell Albright, understood that the "Egyptian oppression" of the Hebrews _began_ under Pharaoh Ahmose I (Greek: Amosis), ca.1540/1530 BCE. The Bible claims that Abraham's descendants will be oppressed 400/430 years, subtract this from 1540/1530 and we have 1140/1130 BCE for the deliverance of Canaan into Israel's hands by God, which "matches" the Israelite destruction of Megiddo ca. 1130 BCE as noted earlier (see above) by Nakhai.
Albright (Emphasis mine) :
"Elsewhere I will survey the new data which have become available in recent years for the period between the settlement of Jacob and his followers in the early Hyksos times through the bitter years of slavery which followed the triumph of Amosis over the Hyksos..."
(pp. 153-154. William Foxwell Albright. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, a Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. [1965 Jordan Lectures at Univ. of London], 1968, 1994)
Albright speaking of the end of the Hyksos empire in Egypt :
"They established an empire of considerable magnitude and held sway over all or most of Egypt for more than a century, until they were driven out about 1540-1530 BC." (p. 57. Albright)
Some scholars date the Hyksos Expulsion as circa 1580-1560, subtracting 400 (Ge 15:13) or 430 years (Ex 12:40) of Egyptian oppression, we get Exodus dates of ca. 1180-1160 or 1150-1130 BCE, subtracting 40 years in the Wilderness renders a Conquest ca. 1140-1120 BCE or 1110-1090 BCE.
It is my understanding that the Hebrews, via an INVERSION, took Egypt's 400+ oppresssion of Canaan and transformed it into Israel "in" Egypt being oppressed. They also used this SAME 400+ year oppression to portray their ancestors IN CANAAN AS JUDGES, before Saul came to the throne (Acts 13:17-22). In other words, historical events occuring in Canaan ca. 1540-1140 BCE are ENMESHED and fused with the Iron I post-Ramesside settlements of Canaan.
Bietak noted that the Hyksos settlement at Tell ed-Daba -believed to be Avaris, the capital of the Hyksos in Egypt- possessed items suggesting that some of them were from Northern Syria and others from Southern Palestine. The Bible suggests that Israel's ancestors, the Patriarchs were from Northern Syria (Haran and Trans-Euphrates), Damascus, and also of Southern Palestine (Beersheba, Hebron, etc.). Perhaps the biblical narratives are "recalling" the Northern Syrian and Southern Canaanite peoples who came to be expelled in the Hyksos Exodus of 1540/1530 BCE ?
Bietak:
"The sites, in particular Tell ed-Dab`a, show that long before the Hyksos, Near Easterners lived in the Nile Delta. The camp sites at Wadi Tumilat show that they were nomads pasturing their flocks. The stable settlement at Tell ed-Dab`a, with its Syrian middle-room houses (dated to the Middle Bronze IIA period), as well as house burials and temple constructions, demonstrate that an urban population of a different background was in residence there. Some of the ceramic and architectural features point toward northern Syria as their origin. This source is also indicated by a locally made cylinder seal, with a representation of the northern Syrian storm god. Another part of the population may have originated from southern Palestine, from where the majority of trade originated."
(p.142. Vol. 2. Manfred Bietak. "Hyksos." Donald B. Redford. Editor. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. 2001)
My thanks to two scholars (David Poling and John Lupia) who recently called my attention to some "ambiguity" concerning Acts 13:24. I have learned from them that ancient manuscripts disagree amongst themselves as to whether Paul is saying 450 years elapsed from the Egyptian oppression to the deliverance of the Promised Land to Israel, or whether 450 years lapsed AFTER the land had been delivered to the days of Samuel.
Here's what Magill has to say about the "disputed" readings:
Acts 13:24
"Paul seems to mean that Israel received the land as their inheritance about 450 years after they left Egypt -400 years in Egypt (verse 17, Acts 7:6), plus 40 in the desert (verse 18), plus the time of Joshua's conquest (5 years by Joshua 14:6, 10). In some manuscripts, this phrase comes later in the verse {C}, "And after these things he gave them Judges about for 450 years." Consult the Commentaries."
(p. 441. Acts 13:24. Michael Magill. New Testament Transline, A Literal Translation in Outline Format. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan. 2002)
Marshall acknowledges that the 450 years presents "a problem" as it contradicts the 480 years appearing in 1 Kings 6:1. He does acknowledge that some "widespread" readings unequivocably assign the 450 years to the rule of the Judges in a footnote:
"Next, God cleared the way for the people into Canaan by driving out seven nations who then occupied the land (Dt 7:1). The period of four hundred and fifty years is difficult to interpret. It seems best to take it of the sojourn in Egypt (400 years), the wilderness wanderings (40 years, verse 18), and the occupation of the land (10 years)."
"footnote 4: One widespread form of the text shifted the expression to verse 20 so that it refers specifically to the period of the Judges, but this would conflict with 1 Kings 6:1."
(p. 223 & footnote 4. "Acts 13:16-22." I. Howard Marshall. The Acts of the Apostles, An Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1980, reprinted 1991)
Magill cites above Acts 7: to claim Acts 13:19 450 years is referring to the 400 year bondage in Egypt. I disagree. If an allusion was being made to a 400 year bondage in Egypt surely the Apostle would know Israel was in Egypt for 400 or 430 years and would have entered this data with Acts 13:17. Instead this data appears in Acts 13:19 AFTER 40 years has been alloted to the Wilderness wanderings in Acts 13:18. My own view here is that Christian Apologists want to "harmonize" Acts 17-22 to support the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1, so they "interpret" 450 years to mean time spent in an Egyptian bondage plus 40 years wandering. Why are they doing this? Because many have the presupposition that the Bible is the word of God and God (or the Holy Spirit) does not contradict himself (itself). The data as it stands in Acts 13:17-22 CONTRADICTS 1 Kings 6:1, so at all costs, this has to "harmonized" with a rationalization that the 450 years is referring to the Egyptian Bondage of 400 years plus 40 years for wanderings plus 5 years for Joshua. Being a Secular Humanist my presuppostion is that the Bible is NOT the word of God, its the work of men who err and when I find contradictions in the text it confirms for me my presuppositions, I do not "need" to harmonize with rationalizations the text to get rid of its contradictions.
If Albright is correct in identifying the "beginning of the Egyptian oppression of Abraham's descendants" as under Pharaoh Ahmose I, ca. 1540-1530 BCE (cf. earlier, above comments), less 400 years of oppression (Ge 15:13) gives us an Exodus ca. 1140/1130 BCE, with a Conquest ca. 1100/1090 BCE. Nakhai noted the fall of Megiddo was ca. 1130 BCE to Israel (cf. earlier, above comments).
Ramesses VI reigned ca. 1141-1133 BCE, and he is the last Pharaoh attested as occupying Canaan. Megiddo's destruction, if occuring after this abandonment could be any time after 1133 BCE. To the degree that the Bible is unaware of any Egyptians defending Canaan, the post 1133 BCE era suggests when the "enmasse" principal invasion occured (Although Merneptah defeated Israel in Canaan ca. 1208 BCE, the Bible is apparently unaware of this event).
How do Christian Apologists handle the above scholarly observations of the Bible preserving an earlier Exodus, 1 Kings 6:1's 480 years being challenged by 591/600 years being the elapsed time between Solomon's fourth year and the Exodus? Here's one Conservative scholar's view regarding scholarly denials of 480 years elapsing:
"1 Kings 6:1 states categorically that the start of Solomon's construction of the temple in the fourth year of his reign (966 BC) followed the exodus by 480 years. Simple addition gives us 1446 (give or take a year) for the Exodus." ( p. 78. "The Exodus: The Date." Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History, From Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Book House. 1981, 1984)
Speaking of Bimson's not accepting literally 1 Kings 6:1's 480 years Aling notes:
"Bimson does not accept 1 Kings 6:1 literally, but states that he is assuming that 1 Kings 6:1 provides only a rough guide to the time of the Exodus, not a precise indication. His rejection of 480 years as the length of time between Solomon's fourth year and the exodus is defended by reference to the yet poorly understood chronological information given in the Book of Judges, which appears to yield more than 480 years for this period."
(pp. 85-86. "The Exodus: The Date." Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History, From Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Book House. 1981, 1984)
Aling explains his literal acceptance of the 1446 BC date for the Exodus after having presented archaeological evidence for why he believes this date being correct:
"...there is no good reason to reject....a date around 1446 B.C...This view is based upon literal acceptance of 1 Kings 6:1..."
(p. 96. "The Exodus: The Date." Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History, From Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Book House. 1981, 1984)
Aling concludes:
"Further, it must be stressed again that [the] Hebrew religion...was the product of divine inspiration...One of the aims of this study has been to defend the biblical chronology for the sojourn and exodus."
(pp. 131& 134. "The Exodus: The Date." Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History, From Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Book House. 1981, 1984)
Kitchen and Hoffmeier both reject 1 King's 6:1's 480 years elapsing from the Exodus to Solomon's fourth year. Why? They are convinced that the mention of Rameses is a clue that the Exodus took place in Ramesside times.
I suspect that two events are being recalled, the 1540/1530 Hyksos expulsion and the 1140/1130 BCE fall of Canaan both events being collapsed and fused together in late Iron II by the descendants of the Iron I intermarriages between Canaanites and Arameans, their Iron II descendants being desirous of preserving the origins traditions of both their forefathers, Late Bronze Age Canaanites and Iron I Israelites (cf. Judges 3:5-7 which mentions the intermarriages of Israel with the Canaanites, Israelite sons marrying Canaanite women, and Israelite daughters marrying Canaanite men).
Judges 3:5-7 (RSV)
"So the people of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the _Jebusites_; and they took their daughters to themselves for wives, and their own daughters they gave to their sons; and they served their gods. And the people of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, forgetting the Lord ther God, and serving the Baals and the Asheroth."
By what "mechanism" did the Bible preserve a Hyksos expulsion, chronologically (cf. comments above by Josephus, Kitchen and Hoffmeier of almost 600 years elapsing from the Exodus to Solomon)? The "Mechanism" is perhaps the _Jebusites_ of Jerusalem whom Israel intermarried with (cf. Judges 3:5-7 above)? David captured Jerusalem and later purchased of Ornan the Jebusite a threshing floor which would become under his son Solomon, the site of the Temple ((1 Chron 21:18-28; 2 Chron 3:1).
According to Manetho there were TWO expulsions of Asiatics from Avaris, the first was of the Hyksos and then hundreds of years later under a pharaoh called Amenophis and his son Ramesses. Manetho has these two individuals coming to power after pharaoh Armais, identified by some scholars with Horemhab of the late 18th Dynasty. This suggests a Ramesside era Exodus was favored by Manetho, which Josephus strenuously objected to, he preferring the earlier Hyksos expulsion as its chronology was more in align with the Bible's chronology, Josephus claiming 612 years elapsed between the Exodus and Solomon. For the details cf. my article titled "Josephus' Hyksos Expulsion vs. Manetho's Ramesside Expulsion." According to Manetho BOTH Exoduses ended up at the same place, JERUSALEM. If Manetho is correct about Jerusalem being settled by the expelled Hyksos then the Jebusites at Jerusalem may have recalled in their oral traditions the expulsion of their Hyksos ancestors and thus Jebusite mothers taught their Iron I (ca. 1230-1100 BCE) "Israelite" sons and daughters about the Late Bronze Age Hyksos and Ramesside Exoduses of their Canaanite forefathers and by Late Iron II (ca. 640-587 BCE) these _two_ Exoduses became fused into the Exodus of the Bible when written down ca. 562 in the Exile. Many scholars understand that the Bible as we have it was put together by priests AT JERUSALEM, why wouldn't these Jerusalemite priests NOT preserve the traditions of a Hyksos and Ramesside expulsion from their Iron I "Jebusite" great-great-great grandmothers/fathers (cf. Judges 3:5-7 above)?
Excavations in Egypt at Tell ed-Dab'a, believed to be Avaris of the Hyksos, revealed that some of these people were literate. The regnal titulary or titles of the HYksos rulers are carved on stone blocks in Egyptian hieroglyphs. So, when the Hyksos were expelled, some among them could write and presumably maintain a history of some sort to be passed on down through the generations. Manetho claimed they settled at Jerusalem. The Bible calls the Canaanite inhabitants of Jerusalem "Jebusites," and they existed at least as late as the days of King David who bought a threshing floor of Aruanah the Jebusite to later erect the Temple upon (Solomon doing the actual construction). What "evidence" do we have that the Jebusites were literate people, able to maintain a historical record of their ancestors? We have the correspondence between Abdi-Heba an Egyptian-appointed prince of Jerusalem to Pharaoh Akhenaten found on clay tablets at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt. The script is Akkadian cuneiform but the language is a Canaanite vernacular. Akhenaten ruled ca. 1350-1334 BCE. According to some Conservative Protestant Scholars, Israel has been residing in Canaan since ca. 1406 BCE (they reckoning the Exodus as ca. 1446 BCE based on 1 Kings 6:1). That is to say, Jerusalem in the "Days of the Judges" (1406 to 1100 BCE) has "scribes" trained in writing Akkadian cuneiform 1350-1334 BCE. So, the notion of a 400 years oppression of Canaan by Egypt could have been maintained in written records at Jerusalem. When the Israelites came to marry Jebusites at Jerusalem (Judges 3:5-7), the notion of a "400 year Egyptian oppression" could have been adapted and transformed into the Biblical traditions of Iron Age II (1100-587 BCE).
Manetho understood that the Hebrew Exodus was a Ramesside expulsion. Josephus disagreed, and using Manetho's data, claimed it was the expulsion of the Hyksos. Archaeologists understand that in Ramesside times, between ca. 1230-1000 BCE, Canaan is being settled in Iron I by Israel, based on the sudden appearance of 250 settlements in the Hill Country.
Today many understand that Avaris, the site of the Hyksos expulsion according Manetho, is to be identified with Tell el-Dab'a. Can excavations at this site clarify the situation ? Bietak, who is charge of the excavations, has noted the site has evidence of a large Asiatic community from 13th Dynasty times and this site is suddenly abandoned in early 18th Dynasty, aligning somewhat with Manetho's account of the expulsion of the Hyksos. Bietak, has noted however, that apparently Ahmose I had a fortress erected and near it exists a settlement of "middle-class" Egyptian homes. These homes appear to have been occupied from ca. 1530 BCE until the time of Pharaoh Amenhotep II who reigned ca. 1453-1419 BCE, based on scarabs found nearby.
Bietak (1996) found no later scarabs, suggesting to him that the site may have been abandoned no later than the days of this pharaoh. What is "remarkable" here, is that the 480 years between Solomon's fourth year, ca. 966 BCE and the Exodus suggests it occured ca. 1446 BCE, which falls in the reign of Amenhotep II and "aligns" somewhat with the final abandonment (?) of Avaris.
Did Israel "build" the Egyptian fortress and its middle-class houses between ca. 1530-1446 BCE? Later on (cf. below) Bietak suggests that Avaris was still in existence and served as a port for Pi-Ramesses (biblical Rameses). So, _if_ I am understanding Bietak correctly, Avaris was occupied right up to Ramesside times (?). I am not sure that I understand Bietak on this correctly as nowhere does he show evidence of an occupation at Tell el-Dab'a from Amenhotep II to Ramesses II. Does he mean Avaris was re-occupied in Ramesside times to serve as Pi-Ramesses' port?
If Tell el-Dab'a is Avaris, and if Josephus and Manetho are correct in this site being the location from which the Exodus began, we have a "problem." The Iron I settlements in the Hill Country of Canaan, assumed to be Israel's, would suggest that Tell el-Dab'a "ought" to have evidence of a _continuous occupation_ by Egyptians and Israelites until Ramesside times if this is where the settlers came from who settlled the Hill Country in Iron I. Yet, Bietak does not have any evidence of an occupation at Tell el-Dab'a from after Amenhotep II ca. 1453-1419 BCE until the days of Horemhab who reigned ca. 1321-1293 BCE. At Tell el-Dab'a he found a cartouche of Horemhab on a lintel within the debris of a temple erected to honor the Egyptian god Seth (cf. pp. 72, 82, & fig. 61 on p. 77. Manfred Bietak.
Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a. London. British Museum Press. 1996)
Did Horemhab and the Ramessides who succeeded him to the throne, renovate Seth's temple, it being in existence since the days of Ahmose I? Or was it in ruins and abandoned for a period of time, between Amenhotep II and Horemhab? If Israel was involved in making mud-bricks for the huge mud-brick platform of the temple, where were the Israelites and Egyptians living at from 1419 to 1321 BCE? Bietak's excavations cover only a small area, so one might argue it is "premature" to argue there was no occupation. But proposals must be on the basis of what is documentable.
Bietak:
"We may now consider the question of how we should envision the condition of Avaris after its fall. The latest stratum of the Middle Bronze Age settlement at Tell el-Dab'a suggests that the town was abandoned. We have a little evidence for a conflagration...For the most part, the settlement appears to have simply ceased...It is now a major surprise to have firm evidence that the Hyksos citadel was re-occupied in the early 18th Dynasty with palatial installations, forming a new royal citadel.
Of special significance is an enormous platform, made of mud-brick walls, about 70.5 meters long and 47 meters wide...About 150 meters to the south-east of platform H/I the remains of a huge building compound, dating also to the early 18th Dynasty, have now been discovered...To the east of the platform H/I, there was a middle-class settlement, which seems to have incorporated workshops. It reveals distinct stratigraphy. The houses were constantly changed and renewed...Within the settlement numerous scarabs have been found, among them a series of royal scarabs. Their relative position is consistent with the succession of the named Pharaohs and covers the time from Ahmose to Amenhotep II...the beginning of this settlement should date to after Ahmose. Because of recent agricultural leveling we do not know if the settlement continued beyond the time of Amenhotep II." (pp. 67-72. Bietak)
"Finally the question arises: what was the function of this early 18th Dynasty occupation on top of the former Hyksos citadel which was restricted to the area about Ezbet Helmi ? ....Ahmose...may well have needed a base and residence for his campaigns in southern Palestine near Egypt's north-eastern border. The extremely favorable and strategically important location of Tell el-Dab'a/Avaris on the Pelusiac branch of the Nile, within the doorway to the north-eastern Nile Delta, gives reason to conclude that again in the early 18th Dynasty, as at the end of the 12th and early 13th Dynasties, the place was put to use as a military base and probably as a dockyard for the preparation of expeditions to the Near East." (p. 81. Bietak)
Bietak suggests that Avaris existed as a seaport called Peru-nefer in 18th Dynasty times, but he acknowledges that he does not have the archaeological proof for this theory:
"In this regard, I would like to draw attention to a suggestion made by French Egyptologists and by Labib Habachi that the famous 18th Dynasty harbour and dockyard Peru-nefer (= 'happy journey') was not situated at Memphis, as previously supposed, but at Tell el-Dab'a. Such an interpretation would explain the presence in Peru-nefer of Canaanite cults, which had a long tradition in ancient Avaris. We are lacking, however, the epigraphic and archaeological evidence to prove this identification, though we hope to find it in the near future." (p. 82. Bietak)
"The region of Avaris was also involved in another important chapter of ancient Egyptian history. The royal residence of Piramesse, which is being studied at present...is located to the north of Tell el-Dab'a at Qantir...In the immediate vicinity of this famous residence of Ramesses II, excavations directed by Edgar Pusch have uncovered barracks for charioteers, stables of royal dimensions and military workshops of the 19th Dynasty. Avaris was still in existence at this time. In keeping with its maritime traditions it was the harbour for Piramesse, and it continued to house the god Seth, who had retained his Asiatic image up to the Ramesside period. The 19th Dynasty most probably originated here. The god Seth, who is the personification of the continuum, again became a dynastic god, 'the god of the fathers' of the 19th Dynasty. The area became once more the capital of Egypt, not only for reasons of sentiment connected with the origin of the dynasty, but because of its enormous strategic importance for international policy." (pp. 82-83. Bietak)
If the Iron I settlers of Canaan are Israelites and if they are coming from Egypt, where is the archaeological evidence of Israel at Avaris from 1530 to 1130 BCE? We have an early 18th Dynasty occupation from Ahmose I ca.1530 to ca. 1453-1419 BCE in Amenhotep II's days then an "apparent hiatus" until Horemhab's days, ca. 1321-1293 BCE. If the Israelites have been in Canaan since the Hyksos Expulsion of ca. 1540/1530 BCE, could this explain why the Iron IA pottery is Late Bronze Age Canaanite (1540-1230 BCE) in general appearance? Did Israel dwell in tents in Canaan thoughout the Late Bronze Age? If so, why give up a nomadic existence for farms and hamlets built of stone in Iron I (ca. 1230-1100 BCE)? The Canaanites were "settled" people living in towns. Did intermarriages with "settled" Canaanites cause an eventual giving up of the nomadic tent-dwelling lifestyle? Some have noted that Pharoh Merneptah's Israel possesses a determinative suggesting they are not yet a "settled" people. Were they tent-dwellers from 1540-1130 BCE?
As noted earlier Manetho claimed a Pharaoh called Amenophis and son Sethos-Rameses expelled reinvading Hyksos descendants from the eastern Delta. OF INTEREST HERE is that Manetho understood that an Egyptian priest of Heliopolis who had leprosy, had INVITED the Hykos' descendants to reinvade Egypt. In other words, Manetho did not understand that the "lepers" of Heliopolis and the rock quarries of Memphis had been expelled in Hyksos times (the 16th century BCE). They were expelled in Ramesside times WITH the re-invading Hyksos descendants. If Manetho is correct about a Ramesside expulsion of Asiatics from the Jerusalem area, then the Iron Age IA settlements which suddenly appear in the Hill Country of Canaan and Jordan (over 600 settlements) could be of expelled peoples _some of whom_ resided in Egypt since or before the 16th century BCE Hyksos expulsion. These people would be -in part- the nucleus of Iron IA Israel. The Bible does suggest that when the Exodus occurred it was not just Israel who left but a MIXED MULTITUDE of other peoples too. Were some of the MIXED MULTITUDE re-invading Hyksos descendants and other peoples brought to Egypt as slaves during New Kingdom times (1540-1260 BCE) from Canaan and Syria?
Exodus 12:37-38 RSV
And the people of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. A MIXED MULTITUDE ALSO WENT UP WITH THEM, and very many cattle, both flocks and herds..."
One encounters in the scholarly literature at times the oft stated assertion that the Exodus is apparently _unrecorded_ in Egyptian annals. One of the "rationalizations ("arguments from silence") which some scholars resort to, is to the effect that Egyptian pharaohs did _not_ record the "defeats" of Egypt ONLY the victories, thus it is not to be wondered that Egypt would remain silent on such an humiliating event.
K. A. Kitchen (an Egyptologist) speaking of the "absence" of the Exodus in Egyptian annals :
"And as the pharaohs _never_ monumentalize _defeats_ on temple walls, no record of the successful exit of a large bunch of foreign slaves (with loss of a full chariot squadron) would ever have been memorialized by an king in the temples in the Delta or anywhere else."
(p. 246. K. A. Kitchen. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003)
Then there are the war-reliefs of Ramesses II carved on his temple facades celebrating his "great victory" at Kadesh on the Orontes over the Hittites, but when the Hittite archives were excavated, they suggested a "stalemate," as the Egyptian border was NOT pushed north of the city. So the Egyptians engaged in a _little_ "spin," making a defeat or "draw" into a resounding victory!
Another Egyptologist, Donald B. Redford, sees things quite differently from Kitchen, he understands that the Hebrews did what Ramesses II did, that is to say, he understands that the defeat and expulsion of the Hyksos under pharaoh Ahmose I was "re-spun" into a mighty vicory for Yahweh, setting his people free :
"In sum, therefore, we may state that the memory of the Hyksos expulsion did indeed live on in the folklore of the Canaanite population of the southern Levant. The exact details were understandably blurred and subconsciously modified over time, for the purpose of 'face-saving.' It became not a conquest but a peaceful descent of a group with pastoral associations who rapidly arrived at a position of political control. Their departure came not as a result of an ignominious defeat, but either voluntarily or as a flight from a feud, or yet again as salvation from bondage."
(p. 413. "Four Great Origin Traditions." Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press. 1992)
Redford's analysis, is not a "new" one though, he was preceded by some 2000 years by the Egyptian priest-historian Manetho and the Jewish historian Josephus, who associated the Hebrew Exodus with the defeat and expulsion of the Hebrews under two events, the Hyksos expulsion and a later expulsion under Amenophis and son Rameses.
If _"IF"_, Manetho and Redford are correct, then the Exodus _IS INDEED_ recalled in Egyptian annals, but as a VICTORY not a _defeat_ for Egypt! It was, then an "earth-shaking event" for both nations, Egypt was LIBERATED and the enemy defeated and chased back to Canaan, while the Israelite version had the Egyptians as oppressors who were defeated. That is to say both versions, Egyptian and Israelite are somewhat "mirror-images" of each other (rather like two sides to the same coin).
Although the Egyptian annals which have been unearthed suggest that the Hyksos did not reign over Egypt for 400 years (they reigned about 200 years in Egypt) they do reveal that after the Hyksos expulsion Egypt ruled over her former oppressors for 400+ years (again another "mirror-image" or inversion/reversal).
Did Yahweh "defeat" Egypt after a period of 400+ years of bondage for his people? Yes, the Hyksos and their descendants in Canaan were "ruled/oppressed" by Egypt from ca. 1540 to 1130 BCE when Ramesses VI withdrew from Canaan, and Israel begins to surface in hundreds of suddenly appearing Iron I villages of stone (some 600+ having been documented by archaeologists on both sides of the Jordan river from the Sea of Galilee to the Dead Sea), wresting the land away from Canaanites who earlier had Egypt's protection against Israel (Merneptah having claimed he defeated a rebellious Israel ca. 1207 BCE).
By what "mechanism" did the Israelites obtain the notion of an Exodus? Redford thinks they are nomadic Shasu wandering the Negev and Edom (Seir) who conquer and settle in Canaan with the Egyptian withdrawal, noting the Exodus stories of Yahweh dawning from Sinai, Seir, Paran and Edom and Egyptian Rameside annals referring to the Yaweh Shasu of Seir.
From a biblical point of view, the "mechanism" might be preserved as Canaanite mothers and fathers teaching their Israelite sons and daughters their Canaanite-Hyksos Origins traditions as noted by Redford. The Bible does suggest that the Israelites DID marry the Canaanites and worship their gods and goddesses.
Judges 3:5-7 RSV
"So the people of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; and they took their daughters to themselves for wives, and their own daughters they gave to their sons; and they served their gods."
Thus, if the Bible is right (Judges 3:5-7) Israel of Iron II (ca. 1000-587 BCE) is an AMALGAM of Canaanites and Hebrews; Why wouldn't these Canaanites NOT pass on to their "Israelite sons and daughters" THEIR Hyksos Expulsion origins, and Egypt's 400 year oppression of their ancestors?
If Israel of Iron II (ca. 1100-587 BC) is recalling not only her Iron I ancestors invasion ca. 1240 BC in Ramesside times but _also_ the 1540/1530 BC Hyksos Expulsion of her Canaanite ancestors then events within Canaan from 1540 BC to 1140 BC "could be" fused together. That is to say the various destructions of Jericho from the Early Bronze II through Middle Bronze II could be fused with the Iron I Conquest via the garbling of traditions handed down from the Iron I Canaanite great-grandfathers and mothers to their Israelite descendants of Iron II (1100-587 BC). Parents _do_ pass on to their children their family traditions and lore.
Why would the Canaanite great-grandfathers and mothers _not_ pass on to their Israelite great-grandchildren of Iron II their Canaanite ancestors' 400+ year oppression under Egypt (Egypt ruling over Canaan from ca. 1540/1530 BCE to ca. 1130 BCE and Pharaoh Rameses VI)? Would an Iron I Israelite who marries a Canaanite wife dare tell his wife she cannot pass on to her child the history of her Canaanite ancestors? Would he dare to tell his Canaanite father-in-law and mother-in-law they cannot pass on to their Isralite grandchildren the family lore of how the Egyptians oppressed them for 400+ years, ca. 1540-1130 BC, the days of Ahmose I until Rameses VI, when Egypt vacated Canaan?
Manetho claimed _two_ expulsions of Asiatics from Egypt from the same location: Avaris. The first was ca. 1540/1530 BCE of the Hyksos. The second was in Rameside times, when the Hyksos descendants reinvaded Egypt and resettled at Avaris again. Manetho claimed that those who were expelled by Ramesside pharaohs returned to Canaan and eventually settled at Jerusalem. That is to say the Hyksos and the Ramesside Asiatics both settled at Jerusalem where the Temple of Solomon was founded and the Holy Texts preserving Israel's past were maintained. Avaris (believed to be modern Tell ed-Dab'a) eventually came to absorbed by a new nearby city called Pi-Ramesses (modern Qantir). That is to say, Pi-Ramesses "absorbed" Avaris as a suburb. So, the two Exoduses mentioned by Manetho could be said to have been from the same location as Avaris came to merged with Pi-Ramesses, taking on its name. So, the Bible correctly recalls an Exodus beginning at Ramesses (Pi-Ramesses) which was created in the 13th century BC _and_ the Canaanite Iron I forefathers of an Iron II Israel also preserved _correctly_ a chronology of an Exodus circa 1540/1530 BC of the Hyksos expulsion from Ramesses (said name replacing Avaris). That is to say the Bible has preserved a Hyksos Expulsion for its Exodus chronologically, but some of the details are Ramesside and later, some sites in Genesis-Joshua not coming into being until the 8-6th centuries BCE.
Perhaps the "greatest surprise" for me _in all the above_ is that Hoffmeier (1996), Kitchen (2003) and Goldstein (2006) despite their realizing that the data within the books of Judges and Kings indicated an earlier date for the Exodus than 1446/1447 BCE, failed to compare their "new Exodus dates" to the Chronologies of the Pharaohs preserved in Clayton's 1994 work. Had they done so, they would have realized that their "extended dates" aligned the Exodus with Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos. Why didn't they take this "final" step? I suspect that in the case of Hoffmeier and Kitchen, that they were mentally committed to a Ramesside Exodus and thus their minds were already "madeup" that whatever Exodus date should surface from their "close-readings" of Judges and Kings, such was to be dismissed as being "further off the mark" from a Ramesside Exodus than the conventional 1446/1447 BCE date. In Goldstein's case, his primary focus was in refuting a 1312 BCE Exodus as preserved in the Rabbinical Seder Olam Rabbah. He achieved his goal. In his conclusions he states his acceptance of a Ramesside date for the Exodus. Thus, like Hoffmeier and Kitchen he too was mentally committed to a Ramesside Exodus and apparently the thought never crossed his mind to take the new Exodus date of 1528 BCE which he had so carefully and painstakingly worked out and correlate it with the reign of a Pharaoh. Had these three fine scholars taken the "final step," they would have realized the Exodus chronology preserved in Judges and Kings aligned that event with Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos.
I want to be quite clear here that I do _not_ understand the Bible to be the word of God. I am a Secular Humanist. It is NOT my intent in this article to argue that the Hyksos Expulsion is _exclusively_ what is being recalled in the Bible because of the chronological information presented here from the Old Testament and the New Testament. I understand that the biblical Exodus is a conflation and fusion of events: Early Bronze II (3rd millennium BCE), Hyksos (16th century BCE), Amarna (14th century BCE), Ramesside (13th-12th century BCE), Iron I (1230-1100 BCE) and Iron II (1100-587 BCE), the Primary History (Genesis-Kings) being composed in the Exile by one author ca. 560 BCE who brought together earlier sources, both oral and written.
Professor Hendel appears to understand that a "memory" of the Hyksos Expulsion could conceivably be recalled in the Bible's Exodus and fused to later events:
"We know that the rule and expulsion of the Hyksos were remembered for centuries in Egypt, where these memories were combined with other traditions. But even if there is a connection with the Biblical account of the Exodus, the Hyksos events have become mingled with many other events and memories concerning Egyptian rule over Canaan during the subsequent period, and the many West Semites that suffered or were taken into slavery during the Egyptian Empire (ca. 1500-1200 B.C.E.). The emergence of Israel occurred at the end of this period, not at the beginning, so the Hyksos expulsion does not connect directly to the Israelite Exodus. But perhaps it does indirectly, through memory, tradition, and other stories of suffering and redemption."
(Ronald Hendel, University of California, Berkeley. "Viewer Beware: The Exodus Decoded." 21 August 2006)
Hendel in another article explores the "memory" of the Exodus, suggesting it might be a conflation of several events from different eras (cf. Ronald Hendel. "The Exodus in Biblical Memory." Journal of Biblical Literature 120/4 (2001) 601-622) http://www.sbl-site.org/Publications/JBL/JBL1204.pdf
Whether the Exodus is the Hyksos Expulsion of the mid-16th century BCE, the Roman Catholic 1512 BCE, Protestant 1446 BCE, Conservative Jewish 1312 BCE (the Seder Olam Rabbah) or the "Liberal" scholars 1260 BCE, NONE can account for why Israel "fears Philistines" upon her departure from Egypt. Most scholars understand the Philistines are the PLST (Egyptian PRST as no L existed in Egyptian) who are one of a group of Sea Peoples who invaded Egypt in the days of Rameses 3rd ca. 1175 BC. It was because of "fear of the Philistines" that Israel did not head for Canaan via the most direct route along the north shore of the Sinai peninsula, but chose to head further south, winding up at Mount Sinai.
If there was no need to head further south because there were no Philistines in Canaan before ca. 1175 BC then perhaps the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai is all fiction? That is to say no-one went to Mount Sinai, they fled along "the way to the land of the Philistines."
Yigael Yadin argued that the last Late Bronze Age burn layer at Hazor indicated its fall to Israel in Iron I (ca. 1230-1100 BC). Moshe Dothan found TWO PHILISTINE SHERDS AT HAZOR, he dates the Philistine settlement in Canaan circa 1175 BCE. If he is correct about the date of the Philistine settlement and the identification of the two sherds, then obviously Hazor was burned AFTER the Philistines' arrival in Canaan. Phaoraoh Merneptah's claim to having defeated Israel (ca. 1208 BC) suggests she was in Canaan BEFORE THE PHILISTINES ARRIVED, so she would have NO NEED to avoid using the coastal route called in the Bible "the way to the land of the Philistines." Until someone can adequately address the "Philistine Problem" all attempts to find a date for the Exodus are going to remain in "limbo." Please click here for the Fall of Hazor and its Philistine Sherds.
There have been attempts to address the problem but they have not met with scholarly approval. Kitchen suggested that the term Philistine was an anachronism, a catch-all blanket term used at a later date to describe peoples in Canaan from the days of Abraham to Moses who blocked Israel's entry into Canaan in a Ramesside Exodus.
Kitchen:
"The charge of "anachronism" is frequently leveled at the appellation "Philistine" found in Gen 21:32, 34 (of the land), and in Gen 26 (of Abimelek of Gerar and his subjects). If, as is clear, the patriarchs and therefore their contemporaries lived in the first half of the second millennium, before circa 1550, then it is no surprise that commentators find difficulty with the term Philistine" in Genesis, seeing that this name for a group of people occurs only from Year 8 of Ramesses III (ca. 1180 or 1177), among his Sea People opponents. It is absent from the alliance of Sea Peoples and Libyans that had earlier attacked Egypt in the fifth year of Merneptah in 1209. So it is fatally easy to scream "anachronism" at this term in the patriarchal narratives...Compare already the tacit later substitution of Dan for Laish in Gen 14:14. Thus some earlier and obsolete term would have been replaced in such cases..."Philistines" later became a blanket term for non-Canaanite, Aegean people in that part of southwest Canaan."
(pp. 339-341. "Early Philistines?" K. A. Kitchen. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003.
The problem for Kitchen's proposal? Abraham battles Philistines over a well he has dug at Beersheba. When excavations were done at this site (Tell es-Saba or Tell es-Seba) the earliest evidence of an occupation was Chalcolithic (Stone Age), then a long period of no occupation. Then in Iron I the site is settled and a great well dug. The earliest sherds found in the Iron I site were a mix of Iron I Israelite pottery and PHILISTINE SHERDS. Here was the evidence of Beersheba being occupied by Israelites in a Philistine world, digging its well. Israelite and Philistine were in the Beersheba area then in Iron Age I (1230-1100 BCE). Please click here for the details.
Conclusions:
The only time period when _most_ of the sites appearing in Exodus and Conquest narratives were in existence and occupied was the 8th though 6th centuries BCE. This apparently is the world the Exodus was placed in by the 560 BCE author writing this account in the Exile in Babylonia. The Bible's internal chronology in the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings has revealed an elapsed period of time From the Exodus to Solomon's reign of nearly 600 years in contradiction to the 480 years mentioned by 1 Kings 6:1 as noted by numerous biblical scholars (Hoffmeier, Kitchen, etc.). When the 600 years is added to 960 BCE and Solomon's 4th year the Exodus falls in the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I who expelled the Hyksos and who founded the 18th Dynasty. Not till after Rameses VI, circa 1130 BCE withdrew from Canaan would Egypt's grip be relaxed permitting the emergence of new nation-states in the political vaccum: Philista, Phoenicia, Israel, Judah, Edom, Ammon and Moab. The settlement of both sides of the Jordan by Israel under Joshua appears to align with the simple stone hamlets and villages of Iron Age I, ca. 1230-1100 BCE which suddenly sprung up. Iron II (1100-587 BCE) witnesses the abandonment of these agrarian communities and the rise of Israel/Judah as an urban centered monarchy.
The biblical account, it appears to me, preserves chronologically a Hyksos Exodus circa 1540 BCE, Ramesside details of the 13th-12th centuries BCE (the building of Rameses and fear of Philistines upon departing Egypt) and a world of villages and cities (conquered by Moses and Joshua) most of whom existed and were occupied only in the 8th-6th centuries BCE. In other words the Exodus is a mishmash of data from different periods of times, thrown together and crafted into a new and somewhat fictional story explaining Israel's origins.
Please click here for an article on the LAST FORTIFIED WALLS OF JERICHO being destroyed at the time of the Hyksos Expulsion.
Please click here for the evidence that Moses did not write the Exodus account and why it is _not_ a reliable eyewitness account of events occurring in the course of the Exodus from Egypt to Canaan.
Bibliography:
William Foxwell Albright. Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, a Historical Analysis of Two Contrasting Faiths. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. [1965 Jordan Lectures at Univ. of London], 1968, 1994.
William F. Albright. "Some Remarks on the Archaeological Chronology of Palestine before about 1500 B.C."
p. 56, in Robert W. Ehrich. Editor. Chronologies in Old World Archaeology. Chicago. The University of Chicago Press. 1954, 1965, reprint 1971.
Charles F. Aling. Egypt and Bible History, From Earliest Times to 1000 B.C. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Baker Book House. 1981, 1984.
Jan Assmann. Moses the Egyptian, The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Harvard University Press. 1997.
Manfred Bietak. Avaris, The Capital of the Hyksos, Recent Excavations at Tell el-Dab'a. London. British Museum Press. 1996.
Manfred Bietak. "Hyksos." p.142. Vol. 2. Donald B. Redford. Editor. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. Oxford University Press. 2001.
James Henry Breasted. A History of Egypt. Chicago. 1912.
Lancelot C. L. Brenton. The Septuagint With Apocrypha: Greek and English. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers. Reprint of 1851 edition published by Samuel Bagster & Sons Ltd., London.
Peter A. Clayton. Chronicle of the Pharaohs, The Reign-by-reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient EgyptLondon. Thames & Hudson. 1994.
William G. Dever. "Is There Any Archaeological Evidence For The Exodus?" p. 71. Ernest S. Frerichs & Leonard H. Lesko. Editors. Exodus, The Egyptian Evidence. Winona Lake, Indiana. Eisenbrauns. 1997.
S. J. De Vries. "Chronology of the Old Testament." p. 584. Vol.1. G. A. Buttrick. Editor. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. Nashville. Abingdon Press. 1962.
Kenneth F. Doig. "The 1552 Exodus." Published in The Journal Catastrophism and Ancient History. Los Angeles. July 1990. pp. 147-157. http://doig.net/OT_Chronology.htm
Jack Finegan. Handbook of Biblical Chronology: Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible. Peabody, Massachusetts. Hendrickson Publishers, Inc. 1964, 1998 Revised Edition.
Alan Gardiner. Egypt of the Pharaohs. Oxford University Press. 1961.
Paula Gooder. The Pentateuch, A Story of Beginnings. Continuum International Publishing Group. 2000, reprint 2005.
Ronald Hendel (University of California, Berkeley). "Viewer Beware: The Exodus Decoded." 21 August 2006)
Ronald Hendel. "The Exodus in Biblical Memory." Journal of Biblical Literature 120/4 (2001). pp. 601-622.
James K. Hoffmeier. Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition. New York. Oxford University Press. 1996.
Tomoo Ishida. "Solomon." Vol. 6, p. 105. David Noel Freedman, Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992.
James W. Jack. The Date of the Exodus in the Light of External Evidence. Edinburgh, Scotland. T & T Clark. 1925.
Simcha Jacobovici. The Exodus Decoded (TV documentary). Airing on the History Channel 20-26 August 2006.
K. A. Kitchen. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003.
K. A. Kitchen. "Egypt, History of (Chronology)." Vol. 2. p. 329. David Noel Freedman, Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992.
K. A. Kitchen. "The Exodus." p. 702. Vol. 2. David Noel Freedman. Editor. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. New York. Doubleday. 1992.
George M. Lamsa. Translation of the Aramaic Text of the Peshitta. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text. Harper & Row San Francisco. [1933], 1968.
Michael Magill. New Testament Transline, A Literal Translation in Outline Format. Grand Rapids, Michigan. Zondervan. 2002.
Professor Claude Mariottini of Northern Baptist Seminary, Lombard, Illinois. "The Date of the Exodus." 27 July 2007.
I. Howard Marshall. The Acts of the Apostles, An Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1980, reprinted 1991.
Amihai Mazar. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000- 586 BCE. New York. Doubleday. 1990.
Bruce M. Metzger & Herbert G. May. Editors. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977.
Stephen C. Meyers. Dating the Exodus. A ThD Dissertation. 1997.Trinity Evangelical Seminary, Florida.
Beth Alpert Nakhai."The Late Bronze Age." p.135. Archaeology and the Religions of Canaan and Israel. Boston, Mass. American Schools of Oriental Research. 2001.
Donald B. Redford. Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press. 1992.
Carol A. Redmount. "Bitter Lives, Israel in and out of Egypt." pp.104-105. Michael D. Coogan, Editor. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. New York and Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1998.
John Romer. Testament: The Bible and History. New York. Henry Holt & Company. 1988.
William H. Steibing Jr. Uncovering the Past. New York & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1994 [1993 Prometheus Books].
Farrell Till. The Skeptical Review: 1990: Number Four: "Textual Contradictions in the Bible."
Ben Witherington. The Acts of the Apostles, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan. William B. Eerdmans. 1998.
