Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Akhenaten and the Hebrew Religion

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Brian Roberts <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>
  • To: "Walter R. Mattfeld" <mattfeld12 AT charter.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Akhenaten and the Hebrew Religion
  • Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 14:26:18 -0400

Dear Walter,

Your points are addressed below.

On Thursday, July 22, 2004, at 02:10 AM, Walter R. Mattfeld wrote:

Dear Brian,

The Bible does tell us that Israel dwelt in Goshen and that when she left
Egypt it was from a place called Rameses. The book of Exodus does NOT
identify the capital of Egypt as being Rameses. It is only stated that
Israel "built" Rameses as a "store-city" and departed from it.

The recurring mention of "Rameses" in the Hebrew Bible must be viewed with some trepidation because of the anachronistic occurrence in Gen. 47:11. Joseph certainly predated Rameses I by anyone's calculation, yet this verse states that he, his father and brothers settled in "the region of Rameses", centuries before the city existed. So, if the occurrence of "Rameses" in Gen. 47:11 is considered by scholars to be an anachronism inserted later by a redactor to make it more readily identifiable to his audience, then why can we not conclude the same sort of anachronism exists for the mention of "Rameses" in Ex. 1:11? Rohl makes this case well in his Pharaohs and Kings. Marianne Luban also shares this view in this thread. It is the only biblical connective tissue to Rameses II as the Pharaoh of the Exodus, but it is an easily assailable one.


The ONLY
verse in the Bible that I am aware of that suggests a "possible" location of
a Pharaonic residence is Psalm 78:12, 43 where it is stated that Moses
withstood Pharaoh "in the fields of Zoan." _For me_, the Bible suggests that
Pharaoh's residence is "near the fields of Zoan," a location far away enough
from Rameses and Goshen that the plagues befalling the Egyptians would NOT
affect the Israelites who dwelt in a _different_ but "nearby" location.

If one looks at a map of the eastern Delta, Zoan, identified today with San
el-Hagar, lies approximately 22 kilometers or 12 miles WNW of Rameses
(Qantir), which in turn is about 8 kilometers or 5 miles ENE of Faqus.
Plagues befalling the Egyptians at San el Hagar, which lies on a "different
branch of the Nile," would make sense while Qantir on the Pelusiac branch of
the Nile "might be" envisioned by the narrator as free of any harm.

The distance between Zoan and Qantir is "not that great" that Moses would
have had a problem going to the location to confront Pharaoh and then return
to Rameses and Goshen on a _daily_ basis.

The problem ? The archaeological data does NOT support the above scenario.

Of course that is your straw man. Feel free to knock it down. It still doesn't affect my suggestions. I never said that Akhenaten was the Pharoah of the Exodus. I suggested that Amenhotep III was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Amenhotep III lost his first-born son. His other son Akhenaten adopted a sort of henotheism with the Aten as his central deity. If the Hebrews were gone from Egypt by the last year of Amenhotep III, they would have likely missed Akhenaten's composition of the Hym to the Aten. I'm suggesting that the flow of influence went from the Hebrews, whose henotheism helped fashion that of Akhenaten.


San el-Hagar first became a Pharaonic residence -based on surviving ancient
Egyptian records- ONLY under the 21st Dynasty established by Pharaoh Smendes
I and was the capital ca. 1081 to 711 BCE, NOT 1446 BCE when most
Conservative scholars understand that the Exodus to have occurred on the
basis of 1st Kings 6:1. In 1446 BCE the capital was at Memphis, which would
have been several days journey, disqualifying it in the Exodus narratives in
my humble opinion.

Simply because the Exodus narratives involving the plaques and meetings between Moses and Pharaoh only focus on the events the writer deemed salient, it still doesn't give us a timeframe for the meetings. They could have taken place over months or years, as the text simply establishes a pattern of presentation (Moses) and refusal (Pharaoh). That being an equal possibility, repeated journeys from Memphis to Goshen would not have been a handicap.


Under Akhenaten, Memphis was abandoned as a capital and a new site was
chosen called Akhet-Aten "Horizon of the Aten," modern day Tell el-Amarna,
_further south_ of Memphis, again, as noted by Karl, too faraway to be the
Pharaonic residence Moses would confront the Pharaonic court at from Rameses
(Qantir) in Goshen (Faqus ?).

Again, archaeological hindrances to the above do not concern my suggestion that Amenhotep III wa sthe Pharaoh of the Exodus.


The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus argued that the Hyksos expulsion (ca
1530 BCE) under Ahmose I was the biblical Exodus. The problem ? Ahmose's
capital was Thebes, again too far south of Qantir/Rameses and Goshen, for
daily confrontations with Pharaoh and his court and no where near "the
fields of Zoan" (Psalm 78:12,43).

Daily?


The "bottom-line" ? No matter "what date" one wants to posit for the Exodus,
be it Josephus' Hyksos, Brians' Akhetaten or Manetho's Ramesside expulsion,
the archaeological data REFUSES to support "in toto" the scenario being
proposed (various other sites mentioned in the Exodus narratives NOT being
in existence in the same time frame or abandoned).

For a map of Zoan (San el Hagar) and Rameses (Qantir) cf. the following url
:
http://www.bibleorigins.net/RamesesMapAvaris.html

For Goshen cf:
http://www.bibleorigins.net/GoshenMapFaqus.html

For problems (Archaeological) with Josephus' Exodus being the Hyksos
expulsion from Manetho's Avaris (Tell el-Daba adjacent to Qantir/Rameses)
cf. the following url:
http://www.bibleorigins.net/Exodus1540BCHyksos.html

Regards, Walter
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Torre, M.A. Ed.
mattfeld12 AT charter.net
www.bibleorigins.net


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Roberts" <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>
To: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
Cc: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Akhenaten and Hebrew religion


Karl,

Ex. 1:11 says the new Pharaoh set up treasure cities at Pithom and
Raamses.

The land of Goshen is mentioned in Ex. 8:22 as being the place where the
Hebrews were quartered. This is in way connected to the palace of
Pharaoh. Again in Ex. 9:26 the Hebrews are located in Goshen, which was
said to be immune to the plagues. Were the Pharaoh's palace and main
army there, they would have fallen under that immunity, according to the
rules of the story.

Besides, the first-born son of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye - Tuthmosis
did die before he could reach the throne. I can see how this story could
have been the impetus for the death of the first-born plague in Exodus.




On Wednesday, July 21, 2004, at 05:01 PM, Karl Randolph wrote:


----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Roberts <formoria AT carolina.rr.com>

What if an exodus event took place at the end of Akhenaten's father's
life?

Akhenaten had broken away by then. at least religiously, his
henotheistic views being well-documented before his father's death.
What
if Psalm 104 carries echoes of the Hymn to the Aten because the
departing Hebrews took it with them?

R. Brian Roberts

Unlikely, as the picture given in Exodus is that the pharaoh had his
capital and main army near the land of Goshen (eastern Nile delta), not
way up in Memphis or Thebes. This situation existed (as far as I know)
only during the Hyksos period and Ramses II and his dynasty. Other
factors make me doubt Ramses II, leaving me, by default, with the
Hyksos.

Why not consider the Hymn to the Aten an echo of Psalm 104?

Karl W. Randolph.
--
___________________________________________________________


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page