Exodus Archeology Evidence

[Spice]

The Biblical narrative of the Exodus begins to make sense when read in the light of the Indus Valley. I give below various levels of evidence in support of this.
Textual Evidence

1. Lack of Egyptian Records:

• There are no Egyptian texts mentioning a large-scale exodus of Hebrew slaves, unlike the biblical account.

1. Josephus and Mahabharata:

• Josephus, citing Aristotle, mentions Jews originating from India, known to Indians as Kalami.
• The Mahabharata describes Krishna (whom Jhunjhunwala equates with Moses) leaving the Indus Valley to an unknown place, which he suggests is Israel.

Ethnographic Evidence

1. Beliefs in India:

• Some Indian communities, like the Krishnaot Yadavas, believe they descend from Krishna, similar to the biblical Hebrews.
• Various scholars and texts suggest a link between Yadavas and Jews.

Genetic Evidence

1. Ashkenazi Jews and R-M124 Gene:

• Although Ashkenazi Jews' genetic makeup largely traces back to the Middle East and Europe, the R-M124 gene, prevalent among certain Indian communities, is found in a small percentage of Ashkenazi Jews.
• This gene might have originated from the Indus Valley population that migrated westward.

Linguistic Evidence

1. Loan Words:

• A minimal percentage of Egyptian loan words in Hebrew suggests limited direct contact.
• Similarities in signs between the Indus Valley script and Northwest Semitic scripts imply possible linguistic connections.

Archaeological Evidence

1. Mud Bricks and Straw:

• The use of straw in making bricks, significant in the Indus Valley, aligns with biblical descriptions of Hebrew slaves collecting straw, which is less emphasized in Egyptian construction.

1. River Events:

• The first plague (river turning red) aligns with the drying of the Yamuna River in the Indus Valley rather than any Egyptian event.

Narrative Parallels

1. Stories and Names:

• Parallels between Hindu texts and biblical stories include the love story of Moses and Tharbis (Krishna and Rukmini) and the golden calf incident (grounding of a pestle).
• 22 names appear in both Hindu texts and the Bible in the same sequence, suggesting common origins.

Geographical Evidence

1. Water Bodies and Volcanoes:

• Three significant water bodies mentioned in the Bible could correspond to the Indus River and other geographical features along a hypothesized migration route from the Indus Valley.
• Mount Sinai's volcanic activity could be analogous to Mount Taftan on the migration path from the Indus Valley.

Conclusion
I conclude that six out of eight categories of evidence favor the Indus Valley hypothesis for the origin of the Jewish people, with the remaining two categories being neutral.

It appears the possibilities found through archeology along with this very sound hypothesis of cultural memory is taking shape more and more as we evolve and explore our Source. It leads to true enlightenment beyond the mythologies that kept it all in play and in mind, as humankind grows "ready."

 

[Tamino]

Doesn't that actually line up with the bible statement that a pharoah came to power who did not know Joseph?

I am not contesting an earlier migration, I am contesting the way that any Semitic people became slaves in Egypt. According to the story of Joseph, his people came into Egypt voluntarily, and then were oppressed and turned into slaves generations later.
According to historical science, some Semitic people immigrated and became rulers(Hyksos). Others immigrated and settled peacefully in the Delta region. And other groups were taken prisoners and brought into Egypt as slaves.
See how there's a lot of contact and migration between Egypt and Levant, but nothing that matches the Exodus account precisely?

Let's also remember, the Israelites were in Egypt for hundreds of years...a 10 year discrepancy is not really an issue

I was talking about a time gap between the death of the Egyptian firstborns and the drowning of the Egyptian army... which happened only a few days or weeks apart (depending on the travelling times one assumes) according to Exodus.
But if the one wants to propose Amenhotep III as Pharao and prince Thutmosis as the dead firstborn, there's a 8-10 year time gap between the death of the prince and the death of the king.

 

[Heyo]

The Biblical narrative of the Exodus begins to make sense when read in the light of the Indus Valley. I give below various levels of evidence in support of this.
Textual Evidence

1. Lack of Egyptian Records:

• There are no Egyptian texts mentioning a large-scale exodus of Hebrew slaves, unlike the biblical account.

1. Josephus and Mahabharata:

• Josephus, citing Aristotle, mentions Jews originating from India, known to Indians as Kalami.
• The Mahabharata describes Krishna (whom Jhunjhunwala equates with Moses) leaving the Indus Valley to an unknown place, which he suggests is Israel.

Ethnographic Evidence

1. Beliefs in India:

• Some Indian communities, like the Krishnaot Yadavas, believe they descend from Krishna, similar to the biblical Hebrews.
• Various scholars and texts suggest a link between Yadavas and Jews.

Genetic Evidence

1. Ashkenazi Jews and R-M124 Gene:

• Although Ashkenazi Jews' genetic makeup largely traces back to the Middle East and Europe, the R-M124 gene, prevalent among certain Indian communities, is found in a small percentage of Ashkenazi Jews.
• This gene might have originated from the Indus Valley population that migrated westward.

Linguistic Evidence

1. Loan Words:

• A minimal percentage of Egyptian loan words in Hebrew suggests limited direct contact.
• Similarities in signs between the Indus Valley script and Northwest Semitic scripts imply possible linguistic connections.

Archaeological Evidence

1. Mud Bricks and Straw:

• The use of straw in making bricks, significant in the Indus Valley, aligns with biblical descriptions of Hebrew slaves collecting straw, which is less emphasized in Egyptian construction.

1. River Events:

• The first plague (river turning red) aligns with the drying of the Yamuna River in the Indus Valley rather than any Egyptian event.

Narrative Parallels

1. Stories and Names:

• Parallels between Hindu texts and biblical stories include the love story of Moses and Tharbis (Krishna and Rukmini) and the golden calf incident (grounding of a pestle).
• 22 names appear in both Hindu texts and the Bible in the same sequence, suggesting common origins.

Geographical Evidence

1. Water Bodies and Volcanoes:

• Three significant water bodies mentioned in the Bible could correspond to the Indus River and other geographical features along a hypothesized migration route from the Indus Valley.
• Mount Sinai's volcanic activity could be analogous to Mount Taftan on the migration path from the Indus Valley.

Conclusion
I conclude that six out of eight categories of evidence favor the Indus Valley hypothesis for the origin of the Jewish people, with the remaining two categories being neutral.

First time I hear of this hypothesis, and I am a bit sceptical. They remembered the story and even some names, but not where they came from?
But it would fix one plot hole of the Exodus story: 40 years (which might mean months) of wandering the Sinai, when the distance from the Nile to the Jordan is two weeks on foot.

 

[Dimi95]

Oh, and I just noticed that we have another mismatch in the timeline... if the Israelites escape Egypt at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III and then start taking over their promised land according to the Amarna letters, your god has miraculously shrunken their 40 year desert wanderings to less than twenty. (The start of their desert trip would have to coincide with the death of Amenhotep III if he was the famous exodus pharao. His son Akhenaten ruled 17 years, and Amarna fell into ruins very shortly after his death, so the Amarna correspondence cannot be younger than this.)

Except the timeline is not accurate.
The time of the Exodus most probably is between 1250-1300 BCE in the time of Pharaoh Ramesses II.

I really want to know how did Moses travelled at that time and menaged to have all the meetings with the Pharaoh.
The capital in the time of Amenhotep III is Thebes and Israelites were stationed in another part of Egypt as you see in the picture.

I will write more about it some other day

 

[Spice]

Except the timeline is not accurate.
The time of the Exodus most probably is between 1250-1300 BCE in the time of Pharaoh Ramesses II.

View attachment 92966

I really want to know how did Moses travelled at that time and menaged to have all the meetings with the Pharaoh.
The capital in the time of Amenhotep III is Thebes and Israelites were stationed in another part of Egypt as you see in the picture.

I will write more about it some other day

But what if they crossed the Red Sea at the Gate of Lamentations.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

It appears the possibilities found through archeology along with this very sound hypothesis of cultural memory is taking shape more and more as we evolve and explore our Source. It leads to true enlightenment beyond the mythologies that kept it all in play and in mind, as humankind grows "ready."

Thank you. Please suggest how to take forward.

 

[Dimi95]

But what if they crossed the Red Sea at the Gate of Lamentations.View attachment 92984

Where did Israelities live then if they crossed that point?

 

[Dimi95]

But what if they crossed the Red Sea at the Gate of Lamentations.View attachment 92984

And there is one detail in Exodus 12 , after the 10 plague.
"During the night Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, 'Up! Leave my people, you and the Israelites! Go, worship the Lord as you have requested."

I really want to know where did the Israelities live and where Pharaoh lived since during the night he summoned them.
The primary source is still the book of Exodus , don't forget that.

 

[Ajax]

Israel Finkelstein archaeologist, professor emeritus at Tel Aviv University and the head of the School of Archaeology and Maritime Cultures at the University of Haifa has written an excellent book in my opinion, called The Bible Unearthed. You will understand why Exodus never happened. You can buy it or download the pdf file from many sites, including Scribd.

 

[Kenny]

Excellent. List two books that you've actually read.

Exodus and Nehemiah.

 

[Kenny]

Exodus is one of the most spectacular event in Bible and I wanted to look it through archeological evidence and I found many interesting things that I wanted to share with you guys. First of all acording Bible Exodus happened around 14/15 century BCE and there are interesting finds from that period.

So thankful you shared this with us.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Exodus and Nehemiah.

Cute ...

... and instructive.​

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

I am not contesting an earlier migration, I am contesting the way that any Semitic people became slaves in Egypt. According to the story of Joseph, his people came into Egypt voluntarily, and then were oppressed and turned into slaves generations later.
According to historical science, some Semitic people immigrated and became rulers(Hyksos). Others immigrated and settled peacefully in the Delta region. And other groups were taken prisoners and brought into Egypt as slaves.
See how there's a lot of contact and migration between Egypt and Levant, but nothing that matches the Exodus account precisely?


I was talking about a time gap between the death of the Egyptian firstborns and the drowning of the Egyptian army... which happened only a few days or weeks apart (depending on the travelling times one assumes) according to Exodus.
But if the one wants to propose Amenhotep III as Pharao and prince Thutmosis as the dead firstborn, there's a 8-10 year time gap between the death of the prince and the death of the king.

The whole idea of slavery in the Bible needs to be re-examined. There is no evidence that there was a long-term slavery. In fact, the Bible says that the problem started when a new king came to power, which means this whole story was limited to one king and maybe extend to 20, 30 years. So, the oppression may be about low wages or something of that type and even the word slavery is not there in the Bible.

The connection with Hyksos does not work because the Hyksos became rulers. The Hebrews never became rulers. The Hyksos fought, lost and fled. There is nothing like that in the Bible. The timing also does not match. Hyksos conquered Egypt in 18 to 17th century BCE, whereas the Exodus took place 15th century BCE or later. So, I think there is absolutely no evidence in Egypt in favor of Exodus.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

First time I hear of this hypothesis, and I am a bit sceptical. They remembered the story and even some names, but not where they came from?
But it would fix one plot hole of the Exodus story: 40 years (which might mean months) of wandering the Sinai, when the distance from the Nile to the Jordan is two weeks on foot.

I am myself not able to answer this question as to why they forgot their origins in the Indus Valley. It one possibility is that during the exile, they were oppressed, and they may have lost memory of Indus Valley, but they remembered the name Mitsrayim. Then they migrated to Egypt, and here they may have renamed their own country Egypt as Mitsrayim in order to capture the legacy. We see very frequently that people capture historical names in order to give more importance to their own places. So, this could be one possibility. I have no other answer for this.

On the point of 40 years, I think it actually means 40 years. The wandering was in the deserts of Iran, near Isfahan. There is a place named Paran near Isfahan, where there is an ancient Jewish community. I do not know from what time, but if Sinai was at Mount Taftan, which is on the eastern edge of Iran, then it is quite feasible that they spent 40 years in Iran. That would also explain that the distance from Nile to Jordan is not relevant because they were coming from Iran, not from Egypt.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Except the timeline is not accurate.
The time of the Exodus most probably is between 1250-1300 BCE in the time of Pharaoh Ramesses II.

View attachment 92966

I really want to know how did Moses travelled at that time and menaged to have all the meetings with the Pharaoh.
The capital in the time of Amenhotep III is Thebes and Israelites were stationed in another part of Egypt as you see in the picture.

I will write more about it some other day

The whole idea of matching the time of the Exodus by looking at the Egyptian, genealogy does not work because the Hebrews did not go to this Egypt at all. They went in my assessment from North India to Sind in Pakistan and the timing should be around 1500 BCE, when the Indus Valley Civilization declined. The site of Chahnu-daro in Sind a big city made with big bricks and it began to decline at 1500 BC. So, the timeline of 1500 BCE, as told by the Bible, seems to be correct.

In my assessment, Moses was living at near Chahnu-Daro in Sind and it was perhaps across the Hakkara river in Gujarat. Therefore, the travel would have been of only about 100 miles or so.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

But what if they crossed the Red Sea at the Gate of Lamentations.View attachment 92984

There is no possibility of the Hebrews having crossed at the Red sea anywhere, whatsoever there are no natural phenomena that matches with it. My study shows that the Indus River could have been the yam-suph of which they crossed. The area has mud volcanoes that spew out mud instead of lava. The eruption of such a volcano upstream of the point of crossing would have stopped the flow of the Indus River for some time, and enabled the Hebrews to cross the river. Then the mud may have gotten eroded and the water may have come back and drowned the Pharaoh. So, we are looking at the wrong place to find the yam-suph or the crossing. I think we need to rework the whole fundamental geography, instead of looking at Egypt, we have to look at Indus Valley.

 

[Ajax]

The earliest mention of Israel in an extrabiblical text was.found in Egypt in the stele describing the campaign of Pharaoh Merneptah.- the son of Ramesses Il - in Canaan at the very end of the thirteenth century BCE. The inscription tells of a destructive Egyptian campaign into Canaan, in the course of which a people named Israel, were decimated to the extent that the pharaoh boasted that Israel's "seed is not".

Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Dimi95]

Israel Finkelstein archaeologist, professor emeritus at Tel Aviv University and the head of the School of Archaeology and Maritime Cultures at the University of Haifa has written an excellent book in my opinion, called The Bible Unearthed.

I am not so sure about his work.

It's a pretty heavily outdated book, at least in terms of what it is most often quoted for. It appears to be, by and far, most well-known for the way it paints the archaeology as describing David as no more than a local chieftain who maybe barely had authority over Jerusalem and a bit of territory around it rather than a ruler who held a "United Monarchy", a single political union between northern Israel and southern Judah under whom he was the leader, and being responsible for a good scale of construction and fortification such as the Fortress of Zion in the City of David.

The biggest problem with the volume is that it relies on Israel Finkelstein's own Low Chronology, which reflects Finkelstein's preference for how the Iron Age strata should be divided and which periods of time they should reflect. Before Finkelstein, the Iron IIA period comfortably was dated to between 1000–900 BC and there was a solid amount of monumental architecture that could be found in this period, such as the monumental fortifications at places like Gezer and Megiddo. By contrast, the Iron I which came before it had nothing like the architecture of the next Iron IIA period, and was seen as more village-ish and low-scale. In two papers between 1995–1996, Finkelstein proposed his "Low Chronology" which would fully downdate these Iron Age strata by about a century. So, David and Solomon went from being part of the Iron IIA period and settlements to being a part of the Iron I settlement, hence Finkelstein's really low-scale characterization of their reigns. The thing is, even when Finkelstein published his pop-book in 2001, it was clear that the majority of archaeologists had rejected his system.Another two decades later, very few archaeologists entertain it anymore. It never helped that Finkelstein depicted himself as a crusader of science in contrast to literally anyone who disagreed with him, even outright humanists and agnostics like William Dever, as basically Bible thumpers. His theory isn't taken too seriously anymore in any case, and I wonder if even he himself holds to it at this point. (His comments from a 2020 paper may suggest he doesn't, though it's not clear.) It's hard to give specific references for further reading, because the bibliography on the Low Chronology is absolutely gigantic. I've got well over a hundred publications saved in my files. In any case, the following quote summarizes the scholarly perspective on his work on this particular topic;

On the other hand, the low chronology has never convinced the majority of archaeologists. In fact, Finkelstein’s hypothesis has perhaps been welcomed more among biblical scholars and the general public, and a few historians as well, than among his fellow archaeologists. In 2001, Ziony Zevit noted that 'practically all archaeologists, old and young, who are working on the Iron Age, have rejected his change of dates as being unfounded'. In 2005 Finkelstein felt obliged to respond to the criticism 'Finkelstein stands alone'. Five years later, William Dever wrote: 'the archaeological consensus today is still in favor of the conventional chronology'. Likewise, in 2014, James Hardin noted that 'most archaeologists still lean towards the more traditional chronology'. Finally, in 2017, Lester Grabbe noted that the rival chronology (the 'Modified Conventional Chronology') have been fairly widely accepted'.)
Matthieu Richelle (translated by Sarah Richelle), The Bible and Archaeology, Hendrickson Publishers, 2018, pp. 86-7.

If you want to get more into the detail of the problems in Finkelstein's Low Chronology, I recommend the treatment on the subject in William Devers' massive Beyond the Texts: An Archaeological Portrait of Ancient Israel and Judah (SBL Press, 2017). Also highly worthwhile is a number of the publications found in the most recent issue of the Jerusalem Journal of Archaeology. Almost every single significant archaeological finding from the 10th century BC since has further contradicted his trying to tie the 10th century as a time of low-scale settlement hence his depiction of David and Solomon, including those findings of the settlement at Khirbet Qeiyafa, the Large Stone Structure, the incredibly large-scale copper production in Edomite settlements, and so on.

You will understand why Exodus never happened. You can buy it or download the pdf file from many sites, including Scribd.

No , i don't think so.

He assumes that only Egyptians could have build the Gate Jaffa and only Egyptians could write hieroglyphics.

During the transition from the Late Bronze to the Early Iron Age(probably about 1250 bce)the Israelites entered Canaan, settling at first in the hill country and in the south. The Israelites' infiltration was opposed by the Canaanites, who continued to hold the stronger cities of the region.

the University of Pennsylvania Museum. have a exhibit on this topic. In brief, Egypt and Canaan (for the purposes of this answer, I’m including only the area about where modern Israel is today) were 'neighbors' for many years and for many years Canaan was basically a province of the Egyptian empire. The influence of Egypt on Canaan was much greater than in the other direction. It is somewhat difficult to think of some things that were not influenced by Egypt.

below a Stele from the reign of Seti I (13th century BCE) found in Timna (southern Israel). It is located in the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem.

The Museum Journal | The Two Royal Stelæ of Beth-Shan

<p>IN the MUSEUM JOURNAL for December, 1923, there appeared the photographs of the two large basalt stelæ discovered that year […]</p>

www.penn.museum

He assumes that land of Caanan was still under Egypt , but that was not the case as Israelities came to Caanan in huge numbers.
Similar to Israelities coming back to Israel after WW II.

 

[Dimi95]

The whole idea of matching the time of the Exodus by looking at the Egyptian, genealogy does not work because the Hebrews did not go to this Egypt at all.

I am not so sure about it either

Full scale, undeniable hard evidence of an Israelite presence in Egypt between 1700-1300 BC. has yet to emerge.Much of the physical culture of the ancient Egyptians themselves has vanished; tombs and temples remain, but the houses of the average Egyptian peasant are long gone. If the material infrastructure of the Egyptians has long since vanished, does that mean that their slaves' also?

There are some intriguing features of homes excavated in the land Goshem which have characteristic layouts of similar homes built in the hill country of Canaan (the 'four chambered house')

Notable exception to this trend may be the houses discovered at Medinet Habu in the suburbs of ancient Thebes, the religious capital of Egypt and the site of the famous Valley of the Kings, the burial place used by several New Kingdom dynasties.

Medinet Habu was the site of the mortuary temple of the 18th dynasty Pharaohs Ay and Horemheb (r. 1323-1292 BC). The temple was completed by Horemheb but later demolished by the Ramesside pharaohs.

So the hypothesis is supported by archeology reports.

They went in my assessment from North India to Sind in Pakistan and the timing should be around 1500 BCE, when the Indus Valley Civilization declined. The site of Chahnu-daro in Sind a big city made with big bricks and it began to decline at 1500 BC. So, the timeline of 1500 BCE, as told by the Bible, seems to be correct.

I am sorry , maybe you have explained this in another topic , but i see just a statement here and no evidence for it.

In my assessment, Moses was living at near Chahnu-Daro in Sind and it was perhaps across the Hakkara river in Gujarat. Therefore, the travel would have been of only about 100 miles or so.

Again , the previous answer applies.

 

[Ajax]

He assumes that land of Caanan was still under Egypt , but that was not the case as Israelities came to Caanan in huge numbers.
Similar to Israelities coming back to Israel after WW II.

And from where do we get this information about huge numbers of Israelites coming to Canaan?
Because most scholars believe that Israelites lived with Canaanites all along.
Are there any extrabiblical references for your claim?