Exodus Archeology Evidence

[shunyadragon]

Thanks.

The 14th Dynasty being a ruling class that was Canaanite in origin can therefore be considered.

For a time the Hyksos, not Hebrews.

 

[GoodAttention]

For a time the Hyksos, not Hebrews.

Hyksos is used in reference to the 15th Dynasty, starting in 1650BCE.

The 14th Dynasty starts in 1803BCE.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The simple fact that Genesis 11:28 have mentioned “Chaldeans”, tell me it couldn’t be written some times in the Late Bronze Age, where traditions have attributed the books (including Genesis) to Moses as author.

So what!

Let me try this one last time.

There is nothing -- absolutely nothing! -- about Genesis 11:28 that serves as logical evidence for your claim that ...

The Exodus was written in the 6th century BCE, when prominent Jews were living in exile after the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar II’s Babylonian army in 587 BCE.

There is nothing -- absolutely nothing! -- about Genesis 11:28 that serves as evidence for your claim that ...

Genesis 11:28, is historically anachronistic. By that logic, Genesis, along with other literature attributed to Moses, was actually composed during the Exile in Babylon, when Chaldean king (Nebuchadnezzar II) was ruling Babylonian empire.

Finally, there is nothing -- absolutely nothing! -- remotely relevant in your sloppily worded comment that ...

There are nothing older than the Ketef Hinnom scrolls.

that securely dates the Book of Exodus to the 6th century BCE.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Hyksos is used in reference to the 15th Dynasty, starting in 1650BCE.

The 14th Dynasty starts in 1803BCE.

Is such dating certainty warranted, or simply convenient?

I ask because I note the Wikipedia entry stating:

There are enough gaps in the knowledge of the 14th Dynasty that its absolute chronological position is debated, and can vary by as much as 75 years between authorities. Egyptologist Kim Ryholt proposes that the 14th Dynasty emerged during the late 12th Dynasty, ca. 1805 BC, during or shortly after Sobekneferu's rule. He contends that the local Canaanite population residing in the eastern Delta declared their independence and staved off possible attempts from the 13th Dynasty Memphite kings to recover the Delta. According to Ryholt, the 14th Dynasty lasted from 1805 BC until its demise under the Hyksos 15th Dynasty ca. 1650 BC, lasting a total of 155 years.​

​

This hypothesis is not shared by some Egyptologists, such as Manfred Bietak, Daphna Ben Tor, and James and Susan Allen, who argue that the 14th Dynasty could not have emerged before the mid 13th Dynasty, ca. 1720 BC, after the reign of Sobekhotep IV.[3][4] In particular, they argue that the evidence from the strata levels where 14th Dynasty seals have been discovered conclusively establishes that the 14th Dynasty was only contemporary with the 13th Dynasty in the last half century of the latter's existence, i.e., after ca. 1700 BC. Additionally, Manfred Bietak has dated the inscriptions and monuments of Nehesy, possibly the second ruler of the 14th Dynasty, to around 1700 BC as well.[5] [source]​

 

[gnostic]

The 14th Dynasty being a ruling class that was Canaanite in origin can therefore be considered.

Might be Canaanites, GoodAttention. Might be.

i hoped that you don’t ignore this post.

All we do know is that the the 14th & 15 dynasties are of Asiatic & Semitic origin, and the Canaanites weren’t the only West Semitic-speaking people during the 2nd millennium BCE, as they could include the Moabites, Phoenicians (eg Byblos), and in northwest Syria, like Ugarit, Alalakh, Nagar (Tell Brak, Nagar became independent from 1900 to 1500 BCE; before it became one of the city-states of the Mitanni, from 1500 to 1300 BCE), and the Amorites (also known during the 3rd millennium BCE as “Mar-tu” in Sumerian & Eblaite, and as “Amurru” in Akkadian).

The Amorites were originally nomadic people, and moved about a lot in the 3rd millennium BCE, as far east as encroaching Sumer, and southwest Levant, including Canaan.

As I before, during the 2nd millennium BCE, the Amorites established the 1st dynasty of Babylon, hence the Old Babylonian Empire (1894 - 1595 BCE). The Amorites have also took over the city Mari, from about 1840 to 1761 BCE.

The Amorites are even more likely candidate to be the 14th dynasty than the Canaanites, and as well as among the constituents that made up the Hyksos.

You are making assumptions that the Canaanites were the only West Semitic people; they were not.

Manfred Bietak have pointed out that temples in the northeast Delta in the 14th & 15th dynasties of Egypt, are quite similar to the architecture in areas controlled by contemporary Amorites in Syria, like Nagar, Alalakh, Ugarit and Byblos.

 

[GoodAttention]

Is such dating certainty warranted, or simply convenient?

I ask because I note the Wikipedia entry stating:

There are enough gaps in the knowledge of the 14th Dynasty that its absolute chronological position is debated, and can vary by as much as 75 years between authorities. Egyptologist Kim Ryholt proposes that the 14th Dynasty emerged during the late 12th Dynasty, ca. 1805 BC, during or shortly after Sobekneferu's rule. He contends that the local Canaanite population residing in the eastern Delta declared their independence and staved off possible attempts from the 13th Dynasty Memphite kings to recover the Delta. According to Ryholt, the 14th Dynasty lasted from 1805 BC until its demise under the Hyksos 15th Dynasty ca. 1650 BC, lasting a total of 155 years.​

I find the use of the term "Memphite" to be interesting, because what exactly is meant by this?

According to Wikipedia, Itjtawy was considered the capital of the 12th and 13th Dynasty until 1677BCE.

Itjtawy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thirteenth Dynasty of Egypt - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This hypothesis is not shared by some Egyptologists, such as Manfred Bietak, Daphna Ben Tor, and James and Susan Allen, who argue that the 14th Dynasty could not have emerged before the mid 13th Dynasty, ca. 1720 BC, after the reign of Sobekhotep IV.[3][4] In particular, they argue that the evidence from the strata levels where 14th Dynasty seals have been discovered conclusively establishes that the 14th Dynasty was only contemporary with the 13th Dynasty in the last half century of the latter's existence, i.e., after ca. 1700 BC. Additionally, Manfred Bietak has dated the inscriptions and monuments of Nehesy, possibly the second ruler of the 14th Dynasty, to around 1700 BC as well.[5] [source]​

Even if we are to say the 14th Dynasty should be dated later, I don't believe this is in contrast or of detriment to consider an understanding of the scripture "slavery period" under Pitom/Itjtawy of the 13th Dynasty.