BBS Tel Dan Stele
Introduction
Our closer summary examination of the Egyptian pharaohs from 1479 to 1001
revealed some interesting facts. Tutankhamun was too young and too sick to be a
combatant. Ramesses II exaggerated his
success at Kadesh for the homefolks: at best it was a stalemate; in reality he
sustained heavy losses, and may have crippled the Egyptian military for
generations. Merneptah was too old to be
a combatant, so all the credits on his stele were the work of subordinates, or
additional exaggerations: the fact that the stele was purloined may indicate
that Egypt was already bankrupt. We
reevaluated the Israelite chronology based on the LXX text, and adjusted the
Egyptian chronology by five to eight years, demonstrating the possibility of an
exact fit and disclosing the chance that Amenhotep II is the pharaoh of
the Exodus. Then we returned to Tel Dan
and Tel Zayit matters to observe that the reality of David’s existence, and the
possibility of Moses’s authorship are both reasonably credible without either
Tel Dan or Tel Zayit. If anything Tel
Zayit damages the cause for the history of writing. In all, nothing was found to support or even
suggest the origination of J around 950, or anything else concerning the
various Documentary Hypotheses. What was
found is that BBS, in the process of jumping around, risks overlooking and
oversimplifying very important material, both biblical and Egyptian.
Script[1]
Tel
Dan Stele (time 53:20)
But then, in 1993 an amazing discovery literally sheds new
light on what the Bible calls ancient Israel’s greatest king.[2] Gila Cook[3] was finishing up some
survey work with an assistant at Tel Dan,[4] a biblical site in the far
north of Israel today. The excavation
was headed by the eminent Israeli archaeologist Avraham Biran.[5] It was near the end of the day, Cook was
getting her last measurements, when she hears a yell from below.
Cook: And it was Biran’s booming voice, “Gila, let’s
go.” And so I waved to him, and
continued working.
N: After being summoned by Biran a second time, Cook had her
assistant load her up. She started down
the hill.
Cook: When I get there, I just drop my bag, and … board, then
I set my stuff down.
N: But something catches her eye. A stone, with what appeared to be random
scratches, but was actually an ancient inscription. This time she yells for Biran.
Cook: And he looked at it and he looked at me and he says,
“Oh my God!”
N: Cook had found a fragment of a victory stele, written in
Aramaic, an ancient language very similar to Hebrew. Dedicated by the king of Damascus to one of
his generals, it celebrates the conquest of Israel, boasting, “I slew mighty
kings who harnessed thousands of chariots, and thousands of horsemen. I killed the king of the house of David.” Those words, the house of David, make this a
critical discovery. They are strong
evidence that David really lived. Unlike
Genesis, the stories of Israel’s kings moved the biblical narrative out of the
realm of legend and into the light of history.[6]
Dever: The later we come in time, the firmer ground we stand
on. We have better sources, we have more
written sources, we have more contemporary eyewitness sources.
N: When the biblical chronology[7] of Israel’s kings can be
cross referenced with historical inscriptions, like the Tel Dan Stele, they can
provide scholars with fairly reliable dates.
King David is the earliest biblical figure confirmed by archaeology to be
historical.[8] And most scholars agree, he lived around 1000
BC, the tenth century. Could any of the
Bible have been written during David’s reign?
The earliest Hebrew alphabet, discovered by Ron Tappy, carved on a stone
at Tel Zayit provides an enticing clue.[9]
Tappy: The stone was incised, with this alphabet, the stone
was then used to build the wall. And the
structure itself suffered massive destruction by fire sometime near the end of
the tenth century BCE [901].
N: The find is even more significant because Tel Zayit was a
biblical backwater, on the fringes of David’s kingdom.
Commentary
How quaint.[10] In the previous segment we suddenly leaped
from the top of the Karnak wall,[11] to a clip about Israelite
polytheistic infidelity, to David and Goliath, to David and Bathsheba, to David
the singing shepherd boy, to Solomon the nation and temple builder, to David
the fictional character.
While we were sleeping, we missed
several main events since, and even before Amenhotep III (1388-1351) wrote
about the Shasu of Yhw at Soleb. Let’s
try to recover some of these historic events.
Egyptians
The Hyksos dynasty (1674-1535) is
far too early to have much, or any relationship with Israel. Based on the successful development of an LXX
chronology, we look for Joseph around 1621.
While there is a temporal match, Joseph is supportive of Egypt, not
antagonistic to it. This could indicate
a power struggle between Upper and Lower Egypt, in which, due to hordes of
starving immigrants, the Israelites get a bad name by association, and get
thrown under the bus along with the other immigrants. However, the Hyksos are expelled, while the
Israelites, still a tiny minority, are allowed to stay unmolested.[12] Conflict arises later, prior to the birth of
Moses (circa 1486). The development of
the Israelites into a substantial population may have triggered bad memories
concerning the Hyksos, among loyal Egyptians, who may have been thinking along
the lines, here we go again.
Nevertheless, the Israelites and the Hyksos are distinct groups. The Hyksos have their own dynasty and are
long gone. The Israelites are peaceful,
and show no desire for dynasty or empire building. It is possible for innocent people to be
oppressed as the result of prejudice, and the bad deeds of others.
Thutmose III (1479-1425) fought
vigorously from Kadesh[13] to Carchemish,[14] in sixteen or seventeen
campaigns, over a period of twenty years, engaging sixty or more cities: Gezer
(possibly Gaza), Joppa, Acre, Megiddo, Hazor, Damascus, Kadesh, Hamath,
Aleppo, Carchemish; against the
city-less Shasu people; yet not against Ashkelon, Ashdod, Jerusalem, Masada, or
Samaria. After attacking Gezer, did he
in fact retreat to Joppa, and from Joppa sail to Acre, and from Acre launch his
battles against Megiddo, Hazor, Damascus, and on to Carchemish?[15]
Amenhotep II (1425-1398 or 1427-1401)
engages: Hazor, Kadesh, Ni,
Qatna, Tunip (Nuhašše or Syria), and Aleppo. In broad generic terms, lower and upper Retenu
are mentioned, but not the Shasu. Does
this reference to the lower Retenu mean Djahy or Canaan?[16] Does upper Retenu indicate Lebanon, and
Amurru? In specific terms, he spent most
of his efforts in Syria, which was then known as Nuhašše. A
ship is mentioned in his first campaign against Kadesh, which may indicate that
he reached strategic targets primarily by sailing. Egyptian power appears to be waning.[17]
Thutmose IV (1398-1388 or 1401-1391)
mentions: Kadesh, Tunip (Nuhašše
or Syria); Naharin (Mitanni or Assyria), Shankhar (Shinar or Mesopotamia), Takhshi
(possibly Persia) and the Shasu.[18] Since we find no reports of campaigns or wars
for Thutmose IV, these mentions may indicate the receipt of ambassadors from
these lands or mentions in honor of his famous grandfather or wedding
guests. He married a Mitanni princess to seal an alliance
with them. The Hittites are not
mentioned. All of this speaks of a great
loss or reduction of Egyptian power or perhaps resting on the laurels of that
power.[19]
Amenhotep III (1388-1351 or
1391-1353) mentions: Joseph-El (possibly Avaris or Canaan), Pella
(Trans-Jordan), Keftiu (Crete), Tyre, Byblos, Damascus, Kadesh, Ugarit, Tunip (Nuhašše or Syria), Nukhashshe[20] (Syria), Qatna, Aleppo, Carchemish, Hatti, Mitanni, Naharin (Mitanni or Assyria), Assyria, Shankhar (Shinar or Mesopotamia),
Takhshi (possibly Persia), Arrapkah
(unknown), Yanoam (unknown), and the Shasu.
This increase in activity may indicate an increase in Egyptian power and
prestige. However, this does not appear
to be an increase in northern campaign activity, since the Amenhotep III
campaigns seem to be limited to Kush (Nubia or Sudan). The Shasu may also be the Shasu of Kush.[21]
Then there seems to be a gap in
northern campaigns starting with Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten (1351-1334), who is
known to have conducted one campaign into Nubia. Akhenaten is better known for his, to
Egyptians, henotheistic and heretical inclinations, which appear to have undone
most of his father’s successes.[22] Smenkhkare (1335-1334) did not leave enough
evidence, or reign long enough, to be involved in any campaigns.[23] Queen Pharaoh Neferneferuaten (1334-1332),
who is possibly also known either as Meritaten, the consort of Smenkhkare, or
as Nefertiti, the consort of Akhenaten, is not likely to have conducted any
campaigns either. In any case, much of
the evidence has been defaced.[24] Tutankhamun (1332-1323), who appears to be
the last male heir of the line of Akhenaten, preferred Thebes over Amarna, and did
much to reverse his father’s religious policy.
Although, “battles with Nubians and Asiatics were recorded in his
mortuary temple at Thebes,” evidently, he may have been physically incapable of
participating in campaigns.[25] Ay (1323-1319), who may have been of mixed
Egyptian-Nuhaššian blood, may not have been a descendent of the Ahmose I
lineage at all. As advisor to Tutankhamun,
at his death, Ay became pharaoh.[26] Evidently, Horemheb, the last pharaoh of the
eighteenth dynasty also attempted to delete all evidence of this age from Akhenaten
to Ay.
Horemheb (1319-1292), possibly a
commoner, engages: Pella, Kadesh, Ugarit, Tunip (Nuhašše or Syria), Qatna, Hatti, Arzawa (Hittite in western Anatolia),
Naharin (Mitanni or Assyria), Assyria, Shankhar (Shinar or Mesopotamia), Altaku (unknown), Lullu (unknown), Papkhi (unknown). The exact nature of Horemheb’s conquests
are not known. Pella is the only piece
of evidence that he showed any interest close to Canaan. Pella’s location may indicate that they were
part of the Assyrian support system, and had nothing to do with Canaan. Considering the vast majority of his targets,
it would make most sense if he sailed to Ugarit and avoided Canaan and
Palestine altogether. From Ugarit he
would logically sweep up the Orontes to Kadesh, then north and west to Arzawa,
and finally east to Shankhar. He may
have been able to count on Mitanni
allies to keep the Hatti under control once they were defeated; Arzawa
may have been delighted to be out from under the Hatti thumb.[27]
Ramesses I (1292-1290), also a
commoner, received the throne from the childless Horemheb, perhaps as a reward
for his loyal service to Egypt. Although
Ramesses gave his name to initiate the new nineteenth dynasty, his life of
service was already spent, his reign of only two years was too brief to mount
campaigns and build monuments.[28]
Seti I (1290-1279) engages: Raphia
(Gaza), lower and upper Retenu, Pella, Beth-Shan (Scythopolis), Alashiya (possibly Cyprus), Isy, Acre, Megiddo, Hazor, Tyre, Uzu (Usu?), Kadesh,
Hamath, Beth-Anath (Ugarit, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Israel), Tunip (Nuhašše or
Syria), Qatna, Hatti, Arzawa
(Hittite in western Anatolia), Naharin (Mitanni or Assyria), Assyria, Shankhar
(Shinar or Mesopotamia), Takhshi (possibly Persia), Altaku (unknown), Kiriath-Anab
(unknown), Kumidi (unknown), Lullu (unknown), Papkhi (unknown), Ullaza
(unknown), Yanoam (unknown), and the Shasu.
The fact that Seti only speaks of Canaan generically leads us to believe
that he had little interest in this area other than to protect his own borders
at Raphia. He had plenty to do in
eleven short years, just to manage his exploits in Nuhašše, Anatolia, Assyria,
deep into Mesopotamia, and Persia. His
presence on Cyprus indicates that his troop movements were by sail. Tales of his exploits in Canaan appear to be
exaggerated. He cannot possibly be the
uncle of Moses at the same time as he engages Israelites in Canaan: his dates
are far too late. His reign is far too
brief to then settle affairs at Kadesh, Arzawa (Hittite in western Anatolia), Shankhar (Shinar or
Mesopotamia), and beyond.[29]
Ramesses II (1279-1213) engages: Jacob-El (possibly Nile Delta, Canaan, or
Philistine), lower Retenu, Moab, Pella, Apheq, Geba (Geva Carmel), Beth-Shan (Scythopolis), Keftiu (Crete), Isy
(Cyprus), Acre, Merom (Hazor), Tyre,
Uzu (Usu?), Rosh-Kadesh, Hamath, Beth-Anath (Ugarit, Egypt, Mesopotamia,
Israel), Hatti, Arzawa (Hittite in
western Anatolia), Mitanni, Naharin (Mitanni or Assyria), Arrapkha, Assyria, Shankhar
(Shinar or Mesopotamia), Takhshi (possibly Persia), Altaku (unknown), Deper
(unknown), Kiriath-Anab (unknown), Lullu (unknown), Migdol (unknown), Papkhi
(unknown), Ullaza (unknown), Yanoam (unknown), and the Shasu. It seems as if Ramesses has been more
concerned with sites in Canaan than any pharaoh since Thutmose III. Still the bulk of these sites are either in
trans-Jordan or near Megiddo.[30] Geba has an alternate location close to
Jerusalem: but the Israelites have not yet captured Jerusalem, so this seems an
unlikely prospect.[31]
Another gap in northern campaigns
seems to start with Merneptah (1213-1203) who was approaching sixty or even
past seventy when he began to reign. It
is unlikely that he personally initiated any campaigns at this age. His campaign against the Tjeḥenu was probably
conducted by younger advisors. As his
father had exaggerated his success at Rosh-Kadesh, we suspect that the son
imitated the father’s practice. We also
have considerable doubt about the afterthought lines on his stele.
Hatti is pacified; The Canaan has been plundered
into every sort of woe: Ashkelon has been overcome; Gezer (possibly Gaza) has
been captured; Yano'am is made non-existent. Israel is laid waste and his seed is not; Hurru is
become a widow because of Egypt.[32]
Considering his extreme age, these
afterthoughts are completely unbelievable.
In spite of other claims, the sites of both Yano'am and
Hurru remain unknown. Expeditions of
previous pharaohs against Yanoam, would more likely place it in Nuhašše,
Anatolia, Mesopotamia, or Esdraelon.
Hurru could easily be Anatolian.[33] Activity at Ashkelon
and Gezer, may be nothing more than the firming of alliances with the
Philistines. At most, the Israel comment
indicates the support of one of Israel’s oppressors in Judges, and not the
direct involvement of Egypt.[34] The only
campaign of Seti II (1203-1197) seems to be that against his
half-brother. Contentions for control of
the throne kept Egypt too busy to engage in war.[35] Amenmesse (1201-1198) is the half-brother,
adversary, usurper of Seti II.[36] We prefer the view that Siptah (1197-1191) is
Amenmesse’s son because both he and Amenmesse are excluded at Medinet Habu.[37] Queen
Twosret (1191-1189) ended her reign with civil war, her tomb was plastered over
by Setnakhte, indicating his total
lack of respect for her.[38] Setnakhte (1189-1186) at most seems to
have restored stability to Egyptian government, thus establishing the twentieth
dynasty, which may be a restoration of the Rammeside line to power. He may have reigned for four years rather
that three, which would seem to set the Egyptian chronology back by one year.[39]
Ramesses III (1186-1155 or 1187-1156):
engages: Karmaim (Sudan), Jacob-El
(possibly Nile Delta, Canaan, or Philistine), Levi-El (possibly Philistine), upper
Retenu, Apheq, Isy (Cyprus), Beth-Dagon (Nuhašše), Tyre, Kadesh, Rosh-Kadesh, Tunip
(Nuhašše or Syria), Qatna, Aleppo, Carchemish, Hatti, Arzawa (Hittite in western Anatolia), Mitanni, Naharin
(Mitanni or Assyria), Altaku (unknown),
Migdol (unknown), Papkhi (unknown), Yanoam (unknown). Ramesses’s expedition(s) again seem to
focus on Nuhašše and Anatolia.
The strength to penetrate Assyria, Shankhar (Shinar or
Mesopotamia), and Takhshi (possibly Persia) appears to be lost. He is beset by Tjeḥenu invasions, and fiscal
decline. Finally, he is assassinated by
his own people led by one of his wives.
The Israelite names Jacob-El, Joseph-El, and Levi-El remain a mystery,
since no certain identification was made for any of them: they may be a remnant
of better days when Egyptian/Israelite relations were on good terms, and thus
name old locations in the Delta or Gaza.[40] In any case there do not appear to be any
expeditions into Canaan proper. The
weakening of Egypt may help explain the rise of Philistine dominance.[41]
A final pre-Davidic gap in northern
campaigns begins with Ramesses IV (1155-1149), after the fiscal and invasion threats
to the Egyptians, he devoted himself to building, rather than war.[42] Ramesses V (1149-1145) experienced loss of
power to the priests and further invasions of the Tjeḥenu.[43] Ramesses VI (1145-1137) continues in decline.[44] Ramesses VII (1137-1130) faces turmoil as
grain prices soar.[45] Ramesses VIII (1130-1129) lapses into
obscurity.[46] Ramesses IX (1129-1111) is more known for the
tomb robberies that took place during his reign,[47] than for his building
projects.[48] Ramesses X (1111-1107) is marked by more
obscurity.[49] Ramesses XI (1107-1077) continued the trials
concerning the tomb robbery scandals, yet his regime was marked by intrigue
involving Piankh and Pinehesy.[50] Smendes
(1077-1051) begins the new twenty-first dynasty in Lower Egypt with its power
center in Tanis,[51]
rather than in Thebes, with only “nominal
authority over Upper Egypt.” No
campaigns are listed.[52] Amenemnisu (1051-1047) had no known
campaigns.[53] Pinedjem I (co-regent) (1062-1039) was the
high priest of Atum and de facto ruler of Thebes until he declared
himself to be the southern pharaoh. He
fought no known campaigns.[54] Psusennes I (1047-1001 or 1052-1001), the
silver pharaoh was a modest builder, not a fighter. He is credited with moving the monuments of
Pi-Ramesses to Tanis.[55]
Israelites
Thus far we have retained the
Israelite chronology as it is maintained in the Masoretic Text (MT). We have postponed any real study of the
Septuagint (LXX) witness. Yet, every day
we discover new evidence concerning the Bible and Egypt: so, if it seems as if
our position is growing and shifting; that’s because it is. This is a bit like working an old picture
puzzle. The pieces were hard enough to
figure out when the puzzle was new. Now
the puzzle edges are old and tattered; parts of the picture are worn off. Whole pieces are lost. Still, the picture becomes clearer every
day. Soon, you will be helping to
complete the task. Here are the results
of our first real exploration of LXX chronology.
Years since Abraham (1836-1406)[56]
Seven Years of Famine (not dated)[57]
Israel enters Egypt with sixty-six people
in all; combined with Joseph and his family seventy-five (1621)[58]
Exodus from Pi-Ramesses (1406)[59]
Mount Sinai (1406-1404)[60]
Rejection of the Covenant and
Resultant Suffering (1404-1364)[61]
Death of Aaron (1366)[62]
Trans-Jordan Wars, Delivery of
Deuteronomy (1366-1364)[63]
Death of Moses (1364)[64]
Jordan, Jericho, Ai, Ebal, Gibeon
(1364-1363)[65]
Counterattack of the Amorite and
Canaanite Coalitions (1363-1354)[66]
Death of Joshua (1354)[67]
Cushan-Rishathaim’s Mesopotamian
Domination (1354-1347)[68]
Othniel of Judah’s Deliverance and
Judgeship (1347-1308)[69]
Eglon’s Moabite Domination
(1308-1291)[70]
Ehud of Benjamin’s and Shamgar of
Anath’s Deliverance and Judgeship; The Philistine presence is already felt
(1291-1212)[71]
Jabin’s and Sisera’s Canaanite
Domination from Hazor (1212-1193)[72]
Deborah of Ephraim’s, Barak of
Naphtali’s, and Jael the Kenite’s Deliverance and Judgeship (1193-1154)[73]
Midianite and Amalekite Domination
(1154-1148)[74]
Gideon’s Deliverance and Judgeship
(1148-1109)[75]
Abimelech Usurps Authority
(1109-1107)[76]
Tola’s Deliverance and Judgeship
(1107-1085)[77]
Jair’s Deliverance and Judgeship
(1085-1064)[78]
Joint Philistine and Ammonite
Domination (1064-1047)[79]
Jephthah’s Deliverance and Judgeship
from the Ammonites (1047-1042)[80]
Ibzan’s Deliverance and Judgeship
from the Ammonites (1042-1036)[81]
Elon’s Deliverance and Judgeship
from the Ammonites (1036-1027)[82]
Abdon’s Deliverance and Judgeship
from the Ammonites (1027-1020)[83]
Continuing Philistine Domination
(1064-1024)[84]
Samson’s Personal Fights (possibly
1064-1045)[85]
Eli’s Priesthood (1114-1024)[86]
Samuel is Prophet, Priest, and King
Maker (unknown)[87]
Saul’s Reign (1050-1010)[88]
The Ark Revolts (1024)[89]
The Ark Vacations in Philistia
(1024-1023)[90]
The Ark at Kirjath Jearim
(1023-1003)[91]
The Philistines Stymied at Ebenezer
(1023)[92]
David’s birth and youth (1040-1010)[93]
David’s Reign over Judah (1010-1003)[94]
David’s Monarchy (1003-970)[95]
David brings the Ark to Jerusalem
(early 1003)[96]
Solomon’s Monarchy (970-930)[97]
Solomon’s Fourth Year, Temple
Construction Begins (966)[98]
Rehoboam’s (930-914) and Jeroboam’s (930-…)
Divided Reigns[99]
Shishak’s Invasion and Domination
(925)[100]
Convergence
BBS has been promoting the idea of
agreement between archaeology and the Bible, using words like convergence,
resonance, synthesis, intersection, and connection. The conclusion of this promotion is that
archaeology and the Bible are opposed to each other. We hope to show some real possibility of
agreement. In our studies of Egyptian
pharaohs we could not help noticing that authorities were willing to credit
Psusennes I with a 41, 46, 51, or even longer reign. Psusennes I terminal date appears to be fixed
at 1001, but his ascension date appears to be quite flexible at 1042, or 1047. We have taken the liberty of putting the idea
of a 51 year reign to the test (1052-1001), to see what happens when the reigns
of pharaohs are shifted backwards by five years. Based on the discovery of the Forth-year
Quartz Stele for Setnakhte, we have also lengthened his reign by one more year. We also credited Smendes with an additional
year because one source lists him as 1077-1071 and another as 1077/1076-1072:
we believe his dates should be corrected to 1078-1072, before any shift is
added: this means that Amenemnisu’s ascension must have a one year error. We arbitrarily added a year to Ramesses XI
based on the uncertainty of his data.
This results in a shift between five and eight years.
We think that such a shift is easily
justified, since several pharaohs have disputed regnal lengths, usually of a
year or two, and since the entire Egyptian chronology seems to be floating a
bit. Without additional discoveries it
is unlikely that we can improve this scenario very much. Our goal is not to prove what is, but to
establish what is credibly and reasonably possible. We need the help of professional
Egyptologists to improve the data: but at least we will now know the sort of
evidence for which we search. After all
it is the quest for such agreement which will finally bring the whole picture
into bright focus. What does such a
proposed shift look like?
At the Exodus from Pi-Ramesses
(1406). The reign and death of Amenhotep
II (1433-1406) now coincide perfectly.
Moreover, the firstborn son, the heir apparent dies (1406) and the
second son, Thutmose IV (1406-1396) ascends to the throne. Although the Thutmose IV records mention
Asia, there is no evidence that he campaigned much of anywhere. He devoted his life to restoring the Sphinx,
and he pulled off a master piece of statecraft by wedding a Mitanni princess,
which would have helped to squelch the Hittites. During the Thutmose IV reign the Israelites
arrive at Sinai, receive the law, and reject the covenant on the basis of the
evil spy report.
Amenhotep III (1396-1359) seems to
enjoy a splash of glory; yet for all the names on his ego wall displays, he
seems to have done limited campaigning in Nubia, giving the bulk of his life to
building projects. Thus the Israelites were
able to complete their wilderness punishment and conquest (1366-1354) without
his interference.
Between 1359 and 1327 the Egyptians
hide themselves in the Amarna period of religious obscurity. Since Akhenaten appears to be imitating
Israelite monotheism, it is only fair to ask why? Akhenaten, not a first son either, could have
easily been a small boy when Yahweh unleashed the plagues on Egypt. It appears that Egypt and her pharaohs have
lost a considerable sense of their empire and traditional deities. Thutmose IV fiddles with the Sphinx,
obviously trying to regain some identity.
Amenhotep III becomes an architect and builder, Akhenaten upends the
complete government and religious system.
This leaves Israel hands-free to ward off a major Mesopotamian threat
(1354-1308).
By the time Horemheb (1327-1300) is
able to restore stability in Egypt, it is too late to do anything other than
fend off Hittite forces and repair eviscerated international relations. He is aided by his friend and colleague Ramesses
I (1300-1298). These two commoners have
rebuilt Egypt, regained much lost prestige, and Ramesses’s children will lead
the new dynasty. However, Israel is now
close to fending off a major Moabite uprising (1308-1291).
When Seti I (1298-1287) takes the
throne he is evidently confronted with major problems in Nuhašše, Anatolia, and
Shankhar. His efforts further south seem
to be limited to border defense at Gaza, and support of forts at Megiddo and Hazor, as well as some involvement
with the Phoenicians.[101] By 1287, the Israelites have completely
suppressed the Moabites, although Seti’s interactions at Pella could indicate
either Moabite support, or defense against Shankhar, or both, or simply
the maintenance of the northern frontier defense continuing from the Plain of
Esdraelon to the other side of the Jordan.
Ramesses II (1287-1221), obviously
not the Pharaoh of the Exodus, continues to have problems in Nuhašše and
Anatolia. Although historians score the
battle with the Hittites as a draw, neither side escaped without massive
casualties, equipment loss, and Ramesses with his life. Hence, the Siege of Dapur (either in Nuhašše
or at Tabor in Canaan) was not much to write home about. Since Dapur is recorded against Hittites, if
at Tabor it indicates Ramesses extreme weakening of forces: he is forced to
withdraw south to lengthen and weaken Hittite supply lines, which appear to be
land dependent. In either case (north or
south) Ramesses the Great is unable to do much about the Israelite
problem. The peace of Ehud and Shamgar
(1291-1212) has nearly come and gone.
Hazor (1212-1193) is staged to overrun Israel, perhaps with little
Egyptian support.
Egyptian strength is very low in the
time of Merneptah through Setnakhte
(1221-1193). Merneptah is an old
man, too old to fight. The Tjeḥenu are
causing trouble in the west and may have overrun the Delta and into Gaza. Problems continue in Nuhašše,
Anatolia, or Mesopotamia. Internal strife tears the empire to
shreds. Setnakhte is finally able to restore some semblance of order. The Canaanites at Hazor (1212-1193), without much
Egyptian support are about to be destroyed.
Egypt is on the brink of ceasing to be the dominant world empire.
Ramesses III (1193-1162) inherits a
bucket of worms. The Karmaim, Tjeḥenu, Nuhašše, and Anatolia are
all up in arms. He appears to be unable
to penetrate Assyria, Shankhar, or Takhshi. One of his wives leads a revolt, and he is
assassinated by his own people, in the internal power struggle. The Israelites annihilate Hazor, Deborah is
Judge (1193-1154).
Egypt is weakened beyond repair for
the rest of the era (1162-1001). The
Israelites have their own self-caused troubles.
Midianites, Amalekites, Gideon, Abimelech, Tola, Jair, Ammonites, Ibzan,
Elon, Abdon, Philistines, Samson, Eli, and Saul all come and go, blown away by
the sands and winds of time. Yahweh
teaches Israel vital lessons about loyalty and worship (1024-1003). Victory comes via miracles and prayer. When the smoke clears away Samuel, the child
priest, one of the greatest heroes of history has vanished without much evidence
of his presence, and an insignificant shepherd boy, David has been made king of
Judah (1010-1003), and of all Israel (1003-970). David, far from being the invincible warrior
that everyone thinks him to be, has spent his first 37 years in insignificance,
most of it running for his life.[102]
Have we reached some level of
agreement yet?
War
There are certain facts of war that
cannot be neglected. Egypt’s major
combat assets include: pharaohs with superior leadership skills and battle
prowess, river navigation skills, advanced archery skills, high-speed
maneuverable chariots, compound bows, the world’s best infantry.[103] Egypt’s weaknesses include loss of
intelligence, athleticism, and strength from excessive inbreeding, or incest;
focus on show rather than reality; excess ambition; lack of open sea navigation
skills; Bronze Age weapons.[104] Having set the stage with pharaoh as god,
weak pharaohs presented a problem that had to be overcome with advertising and
false rhetoric.
War is expensive in terms of its
preparation and conduct, it terms of loss of life and equipment, as well as
through plunder. No one in the history
of man has ever won a war. At the end of
years of international confrontations, Egypt is bankrupt.
In terms of strategy and tactics one
does not put chariots, horses, and infantry through a 500 to 900 mile death
march before entering into battle. When
one is the Master of Rivers, possibly with the aid of Phoenicians to navigate
the Mediterranean, one moves chariots, horses, and infantry on Nile war barges,
preferably to a river mouth for a port, where ranges are within 200 miles. Everyone is fresh and ready for battle.[105] The only other option is to maintain advanced
forts, such as Hazor with permanently stationed chariots, horses, and infantry,
together with all their other equipment, food, and supplies: yet these must
also be supplied by sea.
This adds up to Israel being an irritation, or possible embarrassment, an
optional priority. In the greater scheme
of things, the Karmaim, Tjeḥenu,
Nuhašše, Arzawa, Hatti,
Mitanni, Naharin, Assyria, Shankhar, and Takhshi are
real world, first class priorities, each with the capability of attacking
Egypt. The Israelites mind their own
business, they never attack anybody.
The study of this era must
answer at least one crucial, vital question.
Why is there little or no record of Egyptian-Israelite interaction
during the period from 1406 to 1010?[106] Part of the answer can always be, we haven’t
yet found the records. On the other
hand, two other reasons seem obvious: 1. The Egyptians were too busy elsewhere
to be bothered. 2. The Israelites
interests were spiritual, they never had a goal of physical world domination.
Tel
Dan and Tel Zayit
This is the backdrop for David and Solomon.
It’s nice to find the name of David in writing; yet the Tel Dan Stele (870-750)
is one hundred-forty years later than we would like to see. What would be nice to find is an inscription
of David’s ascension in 1010, or the return of the Ark in 1003.[107] The Mesha Stele (840), discovered around
1868, has several Moabite tangencies with Israel, specifically Omri and Yahweh,
and possibly on line 31, “house of David.”[108] There is also a possibility of a reference to
David in a “Shoshenq Relief” which we are unable to substantiate.[109] So, Tel Dan, is neither the creation nor the
end of proof for David’s historic existence.
As far as Tel Zayit is concerned, the Phoenician or proto-Canaanite
alphabet, which is nearly indistinguishable from the Tel Zayit abjad, was already attested from the
thirteenth, or even eighteenth century.[110] On the other hand, cuneiform texts date from
the thirty-first century.[111] Egyptian hieroglyphs may date from 4000.[112] Moses was certainly educated in cuneiform,
hieroglyphic, and proto-Canaanite/paleo-Hebrew[113] and could have written in any of them. Consequently, the Tel Zayit abjad does not
argue for or against an original Torah manuscript from the hand of Moses in
either 1446-1406 or 1406-1366. This
makes all of the various Documentary Hypotheses unnecessary.
Conclusion
Our closer summary examination of the Egyptian pharaohs from 1479 to 1001
revealed some interesting facts. Tutankhamun was too young and too sick to be a
combatant. Ramesses II exaggerated his
success at Kadesh for the homefolks: at best it was a stalemate; in reality he
sustained heavy losses, and may have crippled the Egyptian military for
generations. Merneptah was too old to be
a combatant, so all the credits on his stele were the work of subordinates, or
additional exaggerations: the fact that the stele was purloined may indicate
that Egypt was already bankrupt. We
reevaluated the Israelite chronology based on the LXX text, and adjusted the
Egyptian chronology by five to eight years, demonstrating the possibility of an
exact fit and disclosing the chance that Amenhotep II is the pharaoh of
the Exodus. Then we returned to Tel Dan
and Tel Zayit matters to observe that the reality of David’s existence, and the
possibility of Moses’s authorship are both reasonably credible without either
Tel Dan or Tel Zayit. If anything Tel
Zayit damages the cause for the history of writing. In all, nothing was found to support or even
suggest the origination of J around 950, or anything else concerning the
various Documentary Hypotheses. What was
found is that BBS, in the process of jumping around, risks overlooking and
oversimplifying very important material, both biblical and Egyptian.
[1]
What is for the most part an exact copy of the script follows. There are a few places where individual
speakers could neither be heard nor understood: for this we apologize. Every effort was made to be precise: there
were just spots that defeated us. Since
this is a quote in its entirety it seemed unnecessary to mark it with quotation
marks. The notation for each speaker is
tedious enough: Narrator, Reader, etc.
If you discover bothersome errors please reply to this Blog and point
them out. You may verify the script more
easily by starting to replay it where the “time” stamps indicate discussion
begins. The second of these links is
free from advertising and thus easier to use.
This blog is found at:
http://swantec-oti.blogspot.com/
[2]
Israel’s greatest king is Jesus, great David’s greatest Son, of Whom Solomon is
the principal icon, not David.
Everything about David focuses on the Glory of his coming Son, typified
with one failed human after another, and finally bearing fruit in the Perfect
Son of Man.
[3]
Gila Cook, a surveyor for Hebrew Union College.
No other bibliography.
[5] Avraham Biran (1909-2008), Israeli archaeologist with Hebrew Union
College. Works: Tel Halifa (1935), Mosul
and Baghdad vicinities, Irbid, Ras El Haruba, Beit She'an (1938), West Bank
(1967), Tel Dan (1966-96).
[6]
Note that here, when it is convenient to BBS storytelling, there is no mention
of J, E, D, or P. Rather Genesis, is
supposedly not historic, while the narratives concerning kings are historic. We readily concede that Genesis is, as far as
we know, completely oral tradition, while Exodus through Deuteronomy are
written eyewitness documentations.
Nevertheless, BBS does not draw the natural comparison between Genesis
and the remainder of Torah, but with the writings attributed to Samuel and
later prophets. This is an interesting
piece of slight-of-hand: for when the various Documentary Hypotheses unfold
they will have nothing to say about Samuel and those who followed him. When the time comes to present the
Documentary Hypotheses, the discussion will be confined to Torah and nothing
more will be said of kings.
[7] A
biblical chronology is not actually being presented by BBS. What is presented is a very limited and
biased archaeological chronology. If we
wish a truly biblical chronology we shall have to construct our own.
[8]
This does not yield or warrant the conclusion (assumption) that earlier
biblical figures are not historical.
This simply confirms what we already knew to be true.
[9]
There is a hidden agenda in the connection between Tel Dan and Tel Zayit. The arguments over historicity are sheer
pretense. If it could be established
that history and writing predate David by wide margins, the 950 date for J
loses all warrant. It is important to
this line of logic that history and writing not precede 1000: for if history
and writing could be established as early as 1406, then it becomes nearly
impossible to deny Moses and the Exodus, or Joshua and Judges.
Yet, if David is necessarily historic, then how is it that all
of the documents that testify about David are not historic. So, Ruth and Samuel, as well as David’s
Psalms must be taken to be historic documents.
That being said, Samuel speaks extensively about Eli and Saul, Samuel
and David, and the problem of Philistine domination and oppression. So the Philistine presence must also be
historic. Yet, if the Philistine
presence is historic, why not all of Judges; and if Judges, why not
Joshua. Then we would have everything
necessary for proof, except a Mesopotamian dig with artifacts naming Cushan-Rishathaim
and Othniel, or something similar.
[10]
It is completely appropriate that both Cook and Biran receive full credit for their discovery. BBS has not always been forthcoming with such
information. That being said, the
reliance of BBS on lengthy dramatized storytelling, although entertaining, is
ultimately annoying and tedious: it has no place in a supposed scientific
report. Hence: it is deserving of the
pejorative epithet, quaint.
[11]
An inference concerning Humpty Dumpty: by exaggerating the information at
Karnak to the detriment of Soleb and Amara West, BBS created a Napoleonic like
ego trip, which ended up being smashed against irrelevant polytheism and
supposedly imaginary Davidic exploit comments.
Science documentaries should concern themselves with evidence, presented
in some logical sequence: yet for BBS everything must be scrambled.
[12]
From ordinary growth mathematics, we conclude that the Israelites could not
have amounted to more than 5,000 people in 1535, when the Hyksos were
expelled. By the birth of Moses around
1486, they would still have been less than 76,000 in number. Their population would not have reached into
the millions until after 1424, just eighteen years before the Exodus.
[13]
Kadesh is deep in Nuhašše territory on the Orontes River, 80 or more miles
north of Damascus.
[14] Carchemish approaches the borders
of Hittite and Mitanni territory on the Euphrates River, near the border of
modern Anatolia and Nuhašše.
[15]
ANET: pages 22, 23, 212, 213, 234-245, 247-249, 251, 373-375, 446, 447
[16] Perhaps only in his final campaign which went no further north
than Galilee. This is probably inside
out. Since the Egyptians were most
likely dependent on sea supplies to maintain the line of forts across Plain of Esdraelon to Beth-Shan and Pella, with such sea support coming from the port at
Acre, we should probably say, no further south than Galillee. It is illusory to believe that Egypt
maintained its worldwide position of dominance by marching through the
Philistine and Canaanite wildernesses.
[17]
ANET: pages 241-245, 247, 248, 449
[18]
Note that, according to Wilson, John A., tr. “Egyptian Historical Texts”, ANET:
page 243, Thutmose IV engaged the Shasu in: ambassadorial exchange, arranged
marriages, combat, religious pilgrimage, sightseeing, treaties, trade
relations, or some other act. All of the
items in Wilson’s list cannot possibly represent combat or martial
campaigns. Egyptians now know of the
Shasu a full ten years earlier than previously thought; and possibly as early
as 1401 or before. Unfortunately, we have
not found Wilson’s documentary source.
The Asiatic campaigns of Amenhotep II also list Shasu
captives. Since the focus of these
campaigns is Nuhašše and the Orontes, we take these Shasu to be either Syrian,
or from the region of Hazor. This moves
Egyptian awareness of the Shasu back to 1427.
ANET: page 247
[19]
ANET: pages 29, 242, 243, 248-250, 449
[20]
Alternate spelling of Nuhašše
[21]
ANET: pages 242, 243, 248, 318, 367, 373, 375, 483, 485, 486
[22]
ANET: pages 318, 319, 369
[23]
ANET: page 483
[24]
ANET: pages 370, 371
[25]
This poor child who was dead at eighteen or possibly nineteen, suffered from
elongated skull, cleft palate, scoliosis, malaria, Köhler disease II, and an infected broken left
leg. He walked only with a cane. Mind you, he had no modern doctor, hospital,
powerful medications, or surgeries to help him cope with any of these maladies:
he suffered on alone, unaided in his pain.
He has neither the maturity nor the physical ability to lead military
expeditions, and we believe that any such activities attributed to him were
actually carried out by generals or other advisors. ANET: pages 8, 249, 251, 252, 319,
469, 470
[26]
ANET: pages 81, 164, 218
[27]
ANET: pages 33, 199, 212, 242, 243, 249-251
[28]
ANET: pages 199, 202, 252, 253
[29]
ANET: pages 8, 10, 199, 202, 212, 242, 243, 250, 252-256, 327, 328, 373, 375,
478
[30]
Note that the assumption of a Ramesses II Exodus, turns the conquest of some of
these cities into gibberish: both for his own reign, yet also in other
reigns. BBS attempts to resolve all of
these internal contradictions by claiming that the Exodus never took place,
except in a minor, unnoticeable scale.
It is difficult to understand why the biblical chronology is
not given greater credibility and respect.
Most of these internal contradictions disappear when the biblical
chronology is followed. Ramesses the
Great is far too late to be the pharaoh of the Exodus. The eldest son, Amun-her-khepeshef died around 1254: his death
would need to have been around 1213, forty-one years later, to mesh with the
Exodus record.
Merneptah is the
thirteenth son: who, because of his father’s exceptionally long life and reign
is already a very old man when he comes to the throne.
[31]
ANET: pages 8, 10, 29-31, 199-201, 216, 236, 242, 243, 249, 252, 253, 255,
256-258, 319, 448, 470, 471, 477, 478, 484; 240-242, 256-258;
[32] Ashkelon and Gezer
(possibly Gaza) are relatively obvious.
We could not locate any dig for Yano'am.
One authority linked it to the Janina of Josephus, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ioannina. This seems farfetched. If we had to guess, we would pick Yokneam, but have only weak reasons for
doing so. In the absence of a dig, it must remain
unknown.
Jezre'el is also
suggested for Israel.
Hurru may refer to
the Hurrians. None of these locations
points to an Israelite presence in the central highlands. Most likely, the Plain of Esdraelon is
indicated: if not there, then Anatolia.
[34]
ANET: pages 258, 259, 375-378
[35]
ANET: page 259
[39]
ANET: page 260
[40]
Jacob-El and Joseph-El date back to 1425 or earlier, so they are unlikely to
relate to Israel’s national identity, and the equation Jacob-El ≡ Bethel/Luz seems farfetched
since the location is well off the beaten path for any other military
objective. The names could fit against
Tjeḥenu invasions.
[41]
ANET: pages 8, 10, 214, 215, 236, 242, 243, 249, 250, 260-263, 373, 378
[42]
ANET: pages 214, 260, 378, 379, 470
[47]
The fact that these tomb robberies caused a scandal at this time may indicate
that Merneptah’s desecration and theft of the Amenhotep III Stele and Temple, may not have been as acceptable to
Egyptians as once thought. However, the
lawyers evidently fixed the trial.
Eventually, tomb robbing later became an acceptable practice. That being said, some of it must be classed
as violent atrocities, when mummies were chopped up with axes to retrieve
valuables. Also some pharaohs took pains
to protect graves from desecration and theft so we cannot believe that
everyone thought this was really acceptable
practice. Egyptians just looked the
other way when pharaohs got involved in the thefts.
[48]
ANET: pages 28
[51]
Since Tanis is not founded until 1039, this presents a dating or geographical
problem. The power center of the
twenty-first dynasty may have been Pi-Ramesses until Psusennes I moved
Pi-Ramesses to Tanis around 1039.
[56] Exodus
12:40-42
[57]
There is unquestionably a tradition of Seven Lean Years in Egypt. This tradition provides considerable support
for the historicity of the life of Joseph: it is at least as strong as the
evidence from the Merneptah Stele. This,
coupled with the Shasu-Edomite connection formed from Papyrus Anastasi 6,
Genesis 36, and Psalm 105; as well as the fourteenth century dates for the
Shasu, found at Soleb, or even earlier with Thutmose IV, and Amenhotep II,
builds a strong case for the historicity of everything in Genesis 36 and
beyond. To reject this line of argument
we must consider all of this material as prehistoric legend: while clearly,
much of it cannot possibly be legend.
ANET: pages 31-32
[58]
Using LXX text in the Old Testament, Genesis 46:26-27; Exodus 1:5; Acts 7:14
[59] Exodus
12:2ff; Numbers 33:3
[60] Exodus
19:11, 15-16; 40:2, 15 [17]; Numbers 1:1; 9-12
[61] Numbers
13:2, 22, 25; 14:32-34
[62]
Numbers 20:29; 33:38
[63]
Numbers chapters 21 through 32; Deuteronomy chapters 1 through 30
[64]
Deuteronomy 31:2; 34:7-8
[65]
Joshua 4:19; 5:6, 10; chapters 6 through 9
[66]
Joshua chapters 10 through 11
[67] Joshua24:29;
Judges 2:8
[68]
Judges 3:8
[69]
Judges 3:11
[70]
Judges 3:14
[71]
Judges 3:30
[72]
Judges 4:3
[73]
Judges 5:31
[74]
Judges 6:1
[75]
Judges 8:28
[76]
Judges 9:22
[77]
Judges 10:2
[78]
Judges 10:3
[79]
Judges 10:7-8
[80] Judges
11:25 [26]; 12:7
[81] Judges
12:9
[82] Judges
12:11
[83] Judges
12:14
[84] Judges
13:1
[85] Judges
15:20; 16:31
[86] 1
Samuel 4:15, 17-22
[87] 1
Samuel chapters 1 through 25; and 28
[88] 1
Samuel chapters 9 through 12; 13:1; Acts 13:21
[89] 1
Samuel 5:1-12
[90] 1
Samuel 6:1; 10-20
[91] 1
Samuel 6:21-7:2
[92]
Clearly the arrest of the Philistines is the result of two things: 1 the
departure of the Ark. 2. Samuel’s
prayer. Although, Yahweh acts
miraculously, He almost always employs a human instrument. 1 Samuel 7:10-12
[93] 2
Samuel 5:4
[94] 2
Samuel 2:11; 5:5; 1 Kings 2:11; 1 Chronicles 3:4; 29:27
[95] 2
Samuel 5:5; 1 Kings 2:11; 1 Chronicles 3:4; 29:27
[96] 2
Samuel 5:7, 9; 6:2-18
[97] 1
Kings 11:42-43
[98] 1
Kings 6:1
[99] 1
Kings 14:21
[100]
1 Kings 14:25 BBS
[101]
Very likely, the pharaohs, the rulers of rivers, cannot move cavalry, chariots,
horses, and infantry without Phoenician
support.
[104]
Egypt’s evident goal was to be the world empire.
[114] If you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations,
please repost, share, or use any of them as you wish. No rights are reserved. They are designed and intended for your free
participation. They were freely
received, and are freely given. No other
permission is required for their use.
No comments:
Post a Comment