Moses, Hebrews leaving Egypt, etc. - backed up by other histories?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

We all know the story of the Egyptian Prince named Moses who was of Hebrew birth who later led the Hebrew slaves out of Egypt. The real question here is whether there are things outside of the Bible backing it up, or at least indicating that such events occurred. Anyone got any ideas on this?

[memphis]

Quoth Wikipedia:
"A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[3] and most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[4] A number of theories have been put forward to account for the origins of the Israelites, and despite differing details they agree on Israel's Canaanite origins.[24] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite, and almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[25] There is archeological evidence of the Caananite Hyksos people moving into and out of northern Egypt, though the relation of their dates to the biblical account is debated by scholars."

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

To the degree that Moshe leaving the land of Mizraim is based on history, it most likely a remembrance of Aten worshippers leaving Egypt after their cult was suppressed.  The name of Moshe is reminiscent of the early XVIIIth Dynasty pharaohs Ahmose I and  Thutmose I-IV. The -mose part of their names means roughly "born of".  Hence Moshe as the name of an Egyptian who gave birth to a monotheistic religion among the peoples to the east of Egypt would be quite understandable.

If it were a thin veneer of priests, they likely wouldn't leave much of an archaeological imprint.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

There is a lot of evidence of Semites/Asians in Egypt during the era in question, but whether any of them were Hebrews hasn't been established.  The earliest reference to Israel is the Merneptah Stele, c. 1210 BC, as a foreign nomadic people the Pharaoh claims to have destroyed.

[DemPGH]

There's no evidence that they were even there as commonly told, and of interest are Egyptian records which are very detailed and which omit their presence / exodus. It's just a story, folklore, perhaps based on some event of lesser significance. Like the plagues, which mostly consist of stuff that would have been relatively common. This lack of evidence, of course, has opened the door for the New Agers to make the even more outrageous claim that aliens came here for goodness knows what reason and did the work that the Israelite slaves supposedly did.

Penn & Teller have some informative and remarkably funny episodes on these stories - I actually caught one not long ago. Penn is a riot.

[Frodo]

There's no evidence that they were even there as commonly told, and of interest are Egyptian records which are very detailed and which omit their presence / exodus.

You are aware that Egyptian records were kept by pharaonic officials who had an interest in propagating propaganda that cast their pharaoh in the best possible light?  The battle of Kadesh, for instance, was cast as a victory by King Rameses II over the Hittites when in actuality it was closer to a draw.  If the Egyptians were bested in battle by a group of runaway Hebrew slaves, what incentive would they have in keeping a record of it? 

[DemPGH]

There's no evidence that they were even there as commonly told, and of interest are Egyptian records which are very detailed and which omit their presence / exodus.

You are aware that Egyptian records were kept by pharaonic officials who had an interest in propagating propaganda that cast their pharaoh in the best possible light?  The battle of Kadesh, for instance, was cast as a victory by King Rameses II over the Hittites when in actuality it was closer to a draw.  If the Egyptians were bested in battle by a group of runaway Hebrew slaves, what incentive would they have in keeping a record of it?  

I'm aware of that, and it does not hold water. Logically, the entire episode did not take place over a couple days, and there would be records of the work they did while they were under subjugation. And besides, Egyptian revisionist historians could not erase archaeological evidence. Plus, there are factual problems aside from the logical problems: first, when the pyramids were built (4th - 6th dynasty) it was a general time of peace anyway, not war and slaving. At least, the Old Kingdom was much less warlike than later ones, and the wars that did happen were recorded. So it's problematic to say the least that evidence of Hebrew slaves would have been deep-sixed. Plus, if it can be surmised that Ramisses (or Thutmose or whoever) was the pharaoh who constructed the pyramids in Exodus, that is obviously factually wrong. It happened much earlier. Then there's the matter that skilled artisans were needed to build those things, and that would not have been Hebrew slaves.

Edit: Oh, supposedly Bible scholars think the Israelite slaves built the city of Rameses. Very highly unlikely. Lower class Egyptians did that. And if the pharaoh's army had been defeated like in Exodus, he would likely have been deposed. But there are other chronological problems that a little reading / research will bring into focus.

The answer is, no, there is no evidence outside the Bible for anything related to the exodus.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Bible never says the Hebrews built pyramids.  Quite the opposite in fact, as it makes clear they were nowhere near Giza and the task they were set to was the building of fortress cities at the eastern edge of the Nile delta.

[DemPGH]

The Egyptians used lower class, skilled, "blue collar" artisans to do their building. There was never an appreciable number of Hebrew slaves in Egypt to constitute an exodus, and there is no evidence that Moses even existed. If there had been "wandering" for forty years, or for any appreciable amount of time, there would be artifacts - as well as other accounts, and artifacts from far earlier than when the exodus supposedly happened have been found. Pottery is the most likely artifact to remain, and nothing has been found to support the claim that Hebrew slaves in large numbers did all this building and then exited to wander the countryside. Let alone defeat the pharaoh's army.

Moses parting the water is deus ex machina, and the whole episode was clearly embellished or made up by the Hebrew scribes to validate their god.

A good parallel is the King Arthur stories. they exist in great detail from the 12th century to the 19th century, largely. I could edit the most interesting parts together in such a way as to form a credible narrative. But yet we are as understandably skeptical of King Arthur as we should be of the Bible.

[color1]

According to the Bible, there is one plague that should leave evidence on Pharaoh and his house.
That plague is the plague of boils that covered skin of the Egyptians including Pharaoh. Exodus 9:9 "It will become fine dust over the whole land of Egypt, and festering boils will break out on men and animals." So is there evidence on Pharaohs for boils?

Thutmose II, Hatshepsut, and Thutmose III mummies have mysterious skin lesions/boils.

Something traumatic happened in Egypt.  A woman becomes pharaoh!  And the latest DNA evidence implies that Thutmose III  is not related to Thutmose II [death of first borns throughout the wives and relatives of pharaohs and all of Egyptians wreaked havoc].  Within 1 pharaoh without boils, Akhenaten comes to power & rejects all of Egypt's gods and worship one sun god.

   The God given plagues and the loss of Egypt's army at the sea, would have traumatized Egypt & there should be evidence for this:  A woman becomes Pharaoh; a son is not related to father (Thutmose II & III) & a Pharaoh rejects Egypt's many gods for one god.

[color1]

I think the Bible is in a different class than the tales of King Authur.

  The Bible is supernatural.

It predicted the destruction of the nation of Israel (happened), the global dispersion of the Jews(happened), the global hatred of the Jews (happened), that the Jews would retain belief in the ONE God after conquest/defeat (happened, very unusual in history for this to happen), they would keep their language despite the global dispersion(happened),  Israel would become a nation  again (happened), City of David, Jerusalem, would become Israel's capital (happened), Jews would return to Israel (happened). A new Temple to be built [not happened yet]

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Within 1 pharaoh without boils, Akhenaten comes to power & rejects all of Egypt's gods and worship one sun god.

Akhenaten was born more than a century after Thutmoses II died.  Also the god Aten that Akhenaten worshiped was a prexisting, albeit minor, deity in the Egyptian mythos.

Also, if there is a historical correspondence between the Exodus and the archaeological record, the XVIIIth dynasty is too early. The exodus itself had to have happened after the battle of Qadesh during the reign of Ramesses II. Sometime in the XXth Dynasty is most likely.

[color1]

Ernest,  I think Tutmose IV didn't reign that long.  So Akhenaten still probably heard from Tutmose III (long reign) in his old old age about Moses & plagues of Egypt.  The fear of GOD still shook Egypt.

The EVIDENCE of the boils points to this exact TIME.  Not Ramses since Ramses had no boils on his mummy.  The boils/skin lesions should have encompassed several generation of Pharaohs (grandfather, father, child, even new born).  The Pharaonic mummy records shows this clearly.  Several generations of Pharaohs suffered the skin lesions.  Those who were young had many more years for the impact of lesions to lessen.  That is exact what is seen in the mummies.

This is the time of Moses.    Thutmose II was probably the ruler.  He died in the chaos of the Exodus.  His sons probably died in the fury to annihilate/re-enslave the Israellites.  Hatshepsut took control in panic/fear of the death of Pharaoh & sons(vacuum).  Thutmose III was put in (not related by DNA Thutmose  II) and proclaimed son of Thutmose II ( a coverup ) as a youth.  

Akhenaten decided that the gods of Egypt to be too weak against Moses' God and elevated the sun god to be supreme.

The end of Thutmose II reign or the beginning of Hatshepsut is the time of the Exodus.

PS: if Hatshepsut was Moses' Egyptian mother, it explains why she received the rulership of Egypt. Moses would not kill his own mother would he?  Egypt needed protection from the God of Moses.  The FEAR of GOD gripped Egypt.

[color1]

Some thinks Exodus happened near 1491 BC:

James Ussher/Paul Hansen: 1491 BCE

James Ussher gave a date of 1491 BCE for the Exodus in his 1654 work, Annales Veteris Testamenti: A Prima Mundi Oigine Deducti.[5] Ussher's work very strongly influences the chronology advocated by Paul Hansen of Answers in Genesis, who uses the same date[6]

A 1491 BCE date would put the exodus in the early 18th Dynasty, during the reign of Thutmose II according to standard chronology[7], though a date early in the reign of Hatshepsut or late in the reign of Thutmose I would be within the +/− 10 year margin of error given by Shaw for the New Kingdom period.

Others think closer to 1447 BC.

[color1]

Last year's DNA testing shows Thutmose III was NOT son of Thutmose II as Egyptians and Thutmose III claimed (cover up).  The real Thutmose III died as the first born of Pharaoh during the Passover.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There are the dual problems of the Hebrew slaves being used to construct the city of Ramesses, which was named after one or more of the Rameside pharaohs of the XIXth and XXth centuries and that in Exodus 13:17, the reason given for God not having the Hebrews take the direct path from Egypt to Canaan was that he did not want them to encounter the Philistines too soon.  The Philistines did not come into their power until the XXth Dynasty.

There really are only two choices, either the Book of Exodus is not an accurate historical record, or the pharaoh who refused to let Israel go was of the XXth Dynasty.

If one posits a connection between Akhenaten's monotheism and the Hebrews, it would be far more likely that it was caused by respect for what the God of Joseph had done for Egypt rather than by fear of what the God of Moses had done to Egypt.  Trying to place Moses in the XVIIIth dynasty, especially in the early XVIIIth dynasty as you are doing means placing Joseph's arrival in Egypt during the chaotic Second Intermediate Period of Egyptian history.

[DemPGH]

Lesions, boils, and bug infestations were ordinary and commonplace; nothing supernatural about that, if it happened - if. There is still not even a little evidence of any exodus from Egypt (thousands upon thousands of people would have left traces), so we just can't say that it happened because a fantastic and outrageous supernatural story was told about it and for which there is no other substantial corroboration.

The Bible fulfills its own prophecies because 1) it was edited to show that and was vague enough for it to be easily done (how many hundreds of messiahs were prophesied to do this or that?- lots) , and 2) the people who wrote the new parts read the old parts and made certain parts of it congruent.

[color1]

Ernest,  Don't know about Josepth.

 The question was is there outside of the Bible evidence for Moses and the Exodus story.   There is only one plague that can provide evidence today.  Egypt's incredible mummification process preserved the skins of the Pharaohs.  We have direct evidence that Thutmose II had skin lesions/boils and 2 other generations of Pharaohs.  We have direct evidence that Thutmose III (son of Thutmose II) is NOT genetically related to Thutmose II (coverup).  That implies that the real Thutmose III (the real first born of Thutmose II) died -- and it was kept SECRET.  The PASSOVER killing of all first born including Pharaoh's house as Exodus clearly states happened.

  Yes there is EVIDENCE that the plague of boils REALLY happened to 3 generation of Pharaohs( the boils/skin lesions were not a genetic passed down thing. All 3 people are not related to each other genetically. All 3 lived at the same time in Egypt).

  Yes there is real concrete EVIDENCE that the real Thutmose III died and an impostor took his place to keep the death a SECRET.  Can't have Gods being killed by Moses' God now can we?

   We have direct evidence for the Biblical account of boils & Passover in Pharaoh's house.

[color1]

Ernest, Biblical prophecies are not all vague.  It stands alone with it's supernatural credentials.

  I just gave you some that no one could say was back dated.
 The Bible says God did something special by expanding the universe -- a fact that science just confirmed the last 6 years. The universe expanded unthinkably in a picosecond.  The Bible stated the earth was round 3000 years ago.  It said the universe would be immense - 'declares the glory of God".  Science 100 years ago thought the universe to be not so large and small.

   The evidence for the Exodus is hard.  What we do have is a people came that built houses patterned after Egyptian style houses - not at all like the local Cannanites.  These people also worshipped ONE God, NOT like the locals who worshipped dozens and dozens of gods.  There is now developing a conquest trail (carbon dating) at Jerico, Hazor around 1410 BCE.  IF Exodus happened near 1470 then around 1410 would make sense for Josuha's conquest.  Error bar on dates is around +- 50 years

[color1]

As I understand it, these are the only 3 Pharaohs that show these skin lesions/boils of all the Pharaohs examined/CAT scanned/visually inspected.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Do you have a cite for Jericho being destroyed so late?  From the best source I've found, the radiocarbon dating of the destruction of Jericho is c.1574 BC ± 44 years at the 95% confidence level.  Any date later than 1500 BC is simply not congruent with the archaeological evidence I've come across.

Of course, that is a big problem for any attempt to assert the historicity of the Hexateuch.  The archaeological record simply does not place the destruction of Jericho at a time at which would allow Joseph to be vizier of a strong Egypt which could have served as the granary of the known world.

As fr the boils, you're aware that it wasn't just pharaohs who were mummified, aren't you?  Any evidence of widespread boils for that time should be able to found in way more than three mummies.

Also, could you provide some sources for your claims?  Many of them are ones I've not read before, and some, such as of the Egyptian style houses, contradict what I have read before.

[color1]

Just Google Jericho carbon dating 1430
  or Hazor carbon dating 1430.

I think the nanny buried/mummified in one of the adjacent sites also had these lesions.

I also think it very interesting that the conflict between Ishmael & Isaac continues today - a step brother conflict from Abraham's time lasting almost 4000 years.
  

""One consideration raised by archaeologists is the introduction of the so-called “four-room house.” This particular architectural feature is so peculiar to ancient Israel that it is called the “Israelite house.” This structure is a typical home featuring a four-room floor plan. Manfred Bietak, the Austrian archaeologist who excavates at Tel el-Daba` (the ancient city of Avaris) notes that he has excavated houses bearing this very floor plan—in Egypt (2003, 29/5:41-49,82-83). If the story of the Exodus is mere fiction, then why is a structure peculiar to ancient Israel, that emerges in Canaan shortly after the time of the Exodus, also found in Egypt in the same region said to have been occupied by the Israelites in the book of Exodus?""

""Israeli archaeologists have recently unearthed a palace at the Tel Hatzor National Park in Upper Galilee, revealing rare findings – jugs containing scorched wheat from some 3,400 years ago.

The find provides still more tangible evidence of the destruction of Canaanite city of Hatzor, an event dated at the mid-13th century B.C.E.

The jugs were found during the excavation of storerooms in what archaeologists say was a palace. In addition to the jugs, many other artifacts found at the site testify to a large fire that raged through the palace – sooty walls, bricks that burned and became rock-hard from the extreme heat, a ceiling that collapsed and burnt cedar wood beams.

The excavations are being conducted by a team from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, headed by Prof. Amnon Ben-Tor and Dr. Sharon Zuckerman.""

JERICHO:""Dr. Bryant Wood has effectively demonstrated that the massive stores of jars still filled with grain, found by Garstang and Kenyon, represent a city not destroyed by siege, but by battle after the spring harvest. Dr. Wood notes: “The pottery, stratigraphic considerations, scarab data and a Carbon-14 date all point to a destruction of the city around the end of Late Bronze I, about 1400 B.C.E.”"  Even the carbon 14 sample of Wood's revised to 1500s allows in the lower range to be 1410 BC.

[color1]

[[Upper end of below data is 1410s ]]

TELL ES-SULTAN (JERICHO): RADIOCARBON RESULTS OF SHORT-LIVED CEREAL AND MULTIYEAR CHARCOAL SAMPLES FROM THE END OF THE MIDDLE BRONZE AGE
(2006)

METHODS The reported samples were analyzed at the conventional 14C laboratory of the Centre for Isotope Research, Groningen, The Netherlands, in 1991 and 1992. All samples were treated by the acid/ alkali/acid (AAA) method, combusted to CO2 and purified (Mook and Waterbolk 1985). The sam- ples were counted for 3-4 days to obtain the best possible precision; in most cases, enough material was available to use the large (25-liter) counter. We also report the 513C values, used for fractionation correction.

RESULTS Multiyear Charcoal Tamarisk is the predominant wood type of charcoal found on the tell; it is also the most common present-day shrub or small tree in the area (Western 1971; Hopf 1983). The 1214C dates of 10 char- coal samples from the end of the MBA gave surprisingly uniform dates (Table 1, Fig. 1). These results confirm 14C laboratory precision at Groningen and archaeological accuracy with regard to stratigraphic relations. The one exception (GrN-18538) consists of the coarse fraction (>0.425 mm) TABLE 1.
Sample Data and Results 14C date S13C

Run Lab no. (yr BP) (%o) date Material
GrN-18539 3312 ± 14 -23.0  Hordeum vulgare
GrN-18542 3288 ± 20 -23.54 Triticum sp.
GrN-18543 3331 ± 18 -23.31 Triticum sp.
GrN-18544 3312 ± 15 -23.28 cereal, fragmented
GrN-19063 3240 ± 18 -23.72 Hordeum vulgare
GrN-19064 3375 ±25 -21.86 cereal, fragmented
GrN-18363 3365 ±25 -26.28
GrN-18365 3360 ±25 -24.36 wood
GrN-18367 3350 ±20 -25.70 wood
GrN-18368 3393 ± 17 -26.02
GrN-18370 3380 ±25 -25.32
GrN-18536 3342± 17 -24.61 wood
GrN-18537 3384 ± 15 -25.98
GrN-19068 3350 ± 16 -25.72
GrN-19223 3388 ± 16 -25.62
GrN-18538 3614 ±20 -24.53 >0.425 mm
GrN-18721 3385 ±20 -24.98 <0.180 mm
GrN-18722 3368 ± 17 -24.92 0.180-0.425 mm

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I see the source of your error.  You are using uncalibrated carbon dates.  Because of variations in the amounts of atmospheric C₁₄, carbon dates have to be calibrated using information from tree rings and other sources where the date can be determined external of the variable carbon dates.  Uncalibrated carbon dates are almost always too recent.

Here's a link to a site where you can input the raw radiocarbon data and get a calibrated result. http://calib.qub.ac.uk/calib/calib.html

Putting the data for the most recent result in your table:
GrN-19063 3240 ± 18 -23.72 Hordeum vulgare (i.e., barley)
(After adding in an additional 21 years since the data was collected in 1991 and 1992.)
yields 1550BC as the most probable date of that sample and 1490BC as the upper bound at the 95% confidence level.  The rest of the samples you cite are all older, but even that most advantageous sample puts the destruction of Jericho as at the latest taking place a decade before the reign of Hatshepsut.

I don't know if your source used the raw data in error or in deliberate disregard of basic radiocarbon dating principles because it needed the uncorrected dates to support its chronology.  Either way, the error is obvious to anyone who isn't desperately trying to shoehorn the evidence to fit into a predetermined chronology.

[color1]

I think they calibrated it with known previous samples to make sure everything was working and dating as expected.  The calibration samples were known to be around 1200 BC.

They will be dating brand new samples from Jericho (late 2012) - carbonized wheat and lot's of it.  So we will have to wait.  Apparently any carbon dating in this region is disputed by 100 -150 years due to volcanic activity that affected carbon levels.  Tree ring seems like a good way to calibrate it.  But is that accurate? Don't trees only live a few hundred years?  Guess they know what they are doing.  We will have to wait for the new samples.  Wood in not good, since wood gets resused or has been in place for hundreds of years.  Wheat should the better time chronometer.