Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Joseph: Israel - Hyksos - Egypt

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <tladatsi AT charter.net>
  • To: <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>, <kwrandolph AT email.com>, <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Joseph: Israel - Hyksos - Egypt
  • Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:53:26 -0500

Karl & Bryant,

The key element that the author seemed to have known was
that the audience would understand that the Egyptians
feared invasion and/or internal revolt. This fear was used
to explain the enslavement / oppression of the Israelites.
The oppression of Israelites actually moves forward the
liberation of the Israelites by increasing their numbers
and sets in motion Moses mission. This is the key literary
(irony) and theological (Yahweh`s control of the situation
despite appearances to contrary) point.

How would either of these point be served by the author if
the king in question were Hyksos? As is agreed, the fact
that of he very existence of the Hyksos was (and is)
largely unknown. Even if the author were aware of this
historical nuance, it would be counter-productive to try to
use this nuance in story. No one would have got it. It
would simply confuse the audience and the blunt the point
of the story. (Imagine watching the movie *The10
Commandments* and Yul Brenner started going on about being
Hyksos and ruling both the native Egyptians and those
foreign Israelites. Even it were historically true, it
would simply have confused everyone watching it and served
no point whatsoever).

This is an entirely different issue from what occurred
historically in Egypt during the Hyksos period and any role
the Israelites might have played then. This is an
archeologically issue that does not inform the translation
or meaning of Ex 1.

It is also an entirely different question from how Ex 1 was
composed and how the historical events in Egypt may have
influenced its composition. If we accept that Moses is
the only author who composed it after the Exodus and he
himself understood all of these nuances, he made no serious
effort to incorporate them into the text. If Ex 1 were
composed by one or more later authors who worked with some
pre-existing oral or written tradition (as the DH folks
would assert) which had some historical core in a possible
Hyksos ? Israelite relationship, they seem to have made it
far less than clear. This could be either because they had
no understanding of the history contained in these
traditions and found it confusing, or, even if they did
understand them themselves, they knew their audience would
find it confusing.

If you would like an analogy (or even if you don`t),
consider the novel Moby Dick by Herman Melville. It is
based on an actual great sperm whale known as either Mocha
Dick or Big Tom. This whale actually sank a New England
whaling ship by ramming it. It was notoriously dangerous
and had killed and maimed other whalers. These historical
facts do not inform the literary or theological thrust of
Melville`s book. Whatever roots in actual history, if any,
are found in Ex 1, they do not assist us in understand or
translating Ex 1. This is not a general rule, only an
observation for this particular story.


Jack Tladatsi




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page