[b-hebrew] Exodus & Hyksos
Harold R. Holmyard III
hholmyard at ont.com
Wed May 26 07:36:14 EDT 2004
>A key element overlooked in trying to tie biblical
>chronology to the archeological record is that fact that
>after the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, the Hyksos
>fled across the Sinai to Canaan, to a fortified city
>Sharuhen (Tell Ajjul, not far from Gaza). Ahmose pursued
>the Hyksos across the Sinai and destroyed their fortress.
>He then conquered all of Canaan and large parts of what is
>now Lebanon and Syria. Egypt control this region lasted
>for hundreds of years after. The Merneptah Stele (1210 BC)
>mentions that Egyptian forces under the command of
>Merneptah in Canaan defeated ?Israel?. Specifically it
>states "Israel is laid waste, its seed is not." (Ashkelon
>and Gezer are also mentioned). The determinative is for a
>people, rather than a state. As late as 1210 Egypt held
>sway over Canaan.
>The point here is for hundreds of years after the expulsion
>of the Hyksos, there is no way for the Israelites to flee
>Egypt, wander about for 40 years, and then enter Canaan.
>Canaan was under Egyptian rule.
HH: Dr. Eugene H. Merrill, in his book Kingdom of Priests, dates the
Exodus to 1440 B.C. and says this:
It might seem strange that Egyptian history knows nothing of the
exodus and conquest, but given the Egyptian penchant for recording
only victories and not defeats, one should not be surprised at the
omission. Amenhotep II (1450-1425), the pharaoh of the exodus, had
either little interest or little stomach for Palestinian conquest
following his fifth year. the year of the exodus. His son Thutmose IV
(1425-1417) apparently undertook only one northern campaign-to Aram
Naharaim. This would have occurred while Israel was in the Sinai
wilderness and so would have had no effect on the conquest. Amenhotep
III (1417-1379) was ruling during Israel's invasion and occupation of
Canaan, but his attention was directed not towards defending his
interests in Canaan, but toward hunting and the arts. Whatever
military activities he did undertake were against Nubia in the south.
This obviously was providential for Israel, for, as has been seen,
the Mitannians, Hittites, and (later) the Assyrians were for the most
part at loggerheads, unable to fill the vacuum that Egypt's
disinterest in Canaan had produced. Only the Canaanites, themselves
totally disorganized, stood in the way.
More information about the b-hebrew