Further to your mention of Hoffmeier and, in partial challenge to Yigal's somewhat categorical claim that there is no extra-biblical support to the Exodus narrative, in a recent article in BAR Hoffmeier does argue for the availability of such evidence, arguing against deniers such as Finkelstein and others.
He points out to recent excavations in the Nile Delta and other Egyptian sources and establishes, e.g. that Delta towns such as Pi'Atoum were not in existence in later centuries and could not be the basis to late narrative projected backwards.
If memory serves I believe that Hoffmeier shows that Ramssess existed as a town only betweem 1275 and 1075 BC.
He uses other places mentioned in the narrative as well as practices of Semetic slave-labour, the practice of mus brick making, harsh quotas and straw deprivation etc. as, again, all pointing to mid 1200 bc as the likely period.
Indeed, if accepted, the numbers would always remain an issue as well as the biblical narrative that claims Exodus as the SOLE demographic source of the emerging Israelite nation, as opposed to being only one component as much evidence suggests, that managed, however, to imprint its lore as central in the Israelites annals known as the Bible.
But away from such "historicity"-- there is, according to Hoffmeier, archaeological and topographical evidence that supports the Exodus narrative as a plausible account of some people's/clans'/families' departure from an abusive sejourn in Egypt circa 1230...
Gad Za'k
Canada
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:50:19 -0800
From: uhurwitz AT yahoo.com
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] Year of Exodus
Yigal has written:
"So, while the match is not perfect, the most logical time for an Israelite
conquest (or whatever historical process came to be described as the
conquest) is around 1200, with the Exodus occuring around 1240 BCE. Of
course, there IS no actual evidence of either..."
There is always the possibility that Exodus does retain general memories.
That some ancestors of Israelites had indeed been in Egypt; that they were
in bondage; and , significantly, picked up there a belief in a single deity
intolerant of other gods, can be supported, though not proven, by much extra-biblical material .
Therefore, one can fully accept the outline of the Exodus story, as well as the
Patriarchs narratives, as Outline History. This was of course done before, see e.g A.Malamat. As for Egypt, no serious discussion of the subject can exclude
the views of K. Kitchen and Hoffmeier.
What is difficult to accept are the large numbers involved in the Exodus narratives;
further, that not all Hebrews had gone to Egypt was assumed by major scholars such as Albright, and Meek a long time ago.
Uri Hurwitz Great Neck, NY
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Liveā¢: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
_______________________________________________
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.