Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] 1450 BCE Exodus ? 'Apiru = Hebrews ?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
  • To: Yigal Levin <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
  • Cc: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] 1450 BCE Exodus ? 'Apiru = Hebrews ?
  • Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 22:00:56 +0100

On 24/07/2004 21:40, Yigal Levin wrote:

Please remember, that the dates given below are all based on the assumption
that Shishak, who invaded Judah in Rehoboam's 5th year, is the same as
Sheshonq I, who invaded "Retenu" in c. 925 B.C.E. I personally do not doubt
the equation, but this just shows that this whole dating scheme is not
purely "biblical" - it is based on modern scholarly research, both of the
Bible and of Egyptian chronology. So the date of 1446 for the Exodus is no
more "Biblical" than any other.


Actually, what depends on this questionable synchronism is not the Israelite dates but the Egyptian ones. The Israelite dates, back to Solomon at least, can be reconstructed from the reign lengths given in Kings and Chronicles, and the known dates of Nebuchadnezzar. The main evidence for the date of the Egyptian Sheshonq I is based on his supposed synchronism with Rehoboam. If this synchronism is abandoned, the absolute dates of biblical events are unchanged. But what does then become variable are the Egyptian dates.

For example, David Rohl (in "From Eden to Exile") dates the Exodus to 1447 BCE, a date based primarily on the same biblical evidence and arguments that Walter has given and just one year different from Walter's date (although Rohl is not a conservative Christian). But Rohl puts this in the reign of Pharaoh Djedneferre Dudimose of the 13th dynasty - in the Second Intermediate Period and conventionally dated just before 1600 BCE. Rohl is able to do this because he radically redates Egyptian, but not Israelite, history. He compresses the Third Intermediate Period, and identifies the biblical Shishak with Rameses II, and the biblical Saul with the Amarna letters' Labayu. This redating is of course too radical for some, but I mention it just to explain that abandoning the Shishak/Sheshonq identification does not imply adjusting the absolute dates of biblical events.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page