ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN HISTORY READING SUMMARIES

These were some summaries that I did for my Ancient Near Eastern History class. Some of it may be a bit boring, but for those interested in the date of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, it might prove enjoyable.

Israel in Egypt

Israel, as is seen in the biblical narrative spent much time in Egypt. Most of that time was spent in the land of Goshen, which is located in the eastern delta.

Pyramid Development

One of the most popular features of Egypt are the pyramids. The pyramids started as “flattop rectangular mud-brick tombs” (2). These were developed by Imhotep and built for Pharaoh Djoser. The building began to become more sloped with smooth sides. What came about was the Red Pyramid which is commonly known as the first true pyramid. Contrary to what many teach, the pyramids where not worked on by any Israelites, but instead were built by local professional builders from surrounding villages.

Pyramid of 12^th Dynasty

Pharaoh Sesostris II was possibly the pharaoh who ruled during the time of Joseph. He built a pyramid that was much smaller than the great pyramids of Giza, and his was made of a mud-brick core with limestone as its casing. Today, all that remains is the core as the outer shell was torn away for other buildings. Sesostris II also wore a uraeus when he was buried. The hat like clothing item had a snake on it to protect him from evil and was made of pure gold.

Abraham

Abraham came to Egypt at the end of the First Intermediate Period. At this time, the 11^th Dynasty was starting to gain its power in Thebes and would eventually take control of all of Egypt. While Abraham was in Egypt he would have most likely met a king from the north who took the title of Pharaoh and would have seen the great pyramids of Giza.

Joseph

After Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers, it was most likely that he would have come into Egypt by the Horus Road. He was sold into slavery of Potiphar right at about the time slavery started in Egypt. When the 12^th Dynasty took over they built their capital city at itj-tawy which is west of the Nile Delta. During this time, the pyramid of Pharaoh Sesostris II was built and would have been the pharaoh under whom Joseph rose to the position of vizier in Egypt. As the most powerful man in Egypt, he would have had right to visit the construction of the pyramid and may have been over the pharaoh’s burying there. So when Sesostris III rose to power, this was when the time of famine came. Sesostris III built his pyramid in Dahshur and Joseph may have been in charge of that. After the famine, Joseph may have retired to the land of Goshen. There was also a tomb found in Tell el-Daba where the bones are missing. Though it was common to rob tombs, bodies were not commonly taken. This tomb may have been empty because of the bones of Joseph taken back to Canaan.

Hyksos

The Hyksos were people who came to Egypt from southern Canaan and took over the eastern part of the delta. They took for themselves the title of pharaoh and ruled in Egypt for 108 years. They have come to be known as Egypt’s 15^th Dynasty. The Pharaoh who did not know of Joseph was probably a Hyksos pharaoh and the one who places Israelites into slavery. Once Egyptians forced out the Hyksos under Amosis, ruler of the 18^th Dynasty, they would have taken over it capital city Avaris, renaming it Peru-nefer.

Moses

The Bible tells of Moses’ salvation in the Nile and his adoption by Pharaoh’s daughter, probably Hatshepsut. This makes it seem like the royal family would have had a presence in Goshen. It was in the former Hyksos capital. There appears to be a palace that is in the right area and right time to be the palace where Moses was raised and confronted Pharaoh.

Rameses

The Bible records that Jacob and his family settled in the land of Rameses, were slaves there, and left from Rameses. However, the name Rameses was not around during the time of Israel’s departure from Egypt. It did not come along until the Pharaoh by that name. Thus, the scribes of the Bible edited the Scriptures later on to help the readers understand the location.

Egypt during the period of the Kingdom of Judah

During the time of the Babylonian empire, many Israelites traveled to Egyptian cities in the north for refuge. Memphis is only mentioned as a city of God’s judgment. Heliopolis was an important city in the Old Kingdom and was also said to be under God’s judgment. Bubastls was located in the delta and said to be under God’s judgment. Zoan is the Hebrew name for Tanis and became the official residence of the 21^st Dynasty during the time of the Judean monarchy. Tahpanhes became a safe haven for Jews, including Jeremiah, during the time of Babylonian invasion and Jeremiah pronounced judgment on them. Pelusium was a fortress in Egypt’s northeast corner. Migdol is another place where Jews resided during the Babylonian invasion and a city God judged.

Conclusion

The key to understanding Egyptian history is to consider the invasion of the Hyksos and how, from that point, on Egypt was very concerned with attackers form the north. Living in Egypt was a good experience for Israel, but when the Hyksos people came in who did not know Joseph, it lead to their slavery. Even after the restoration of Egyptian rule throughout Egypt, the Israelites still had to serve under slavery. Then during the invasion of Babylonia, many Jew traveled to Egypt, and it became clear that they could run, but they could not hide.

Cultural Change and the Confusion of Language in Ancient Sumer

The Sumer people come from the “land between the two rivers” (the Tigris and Euphrates), located in Mesopotamia. However, there are some questions that are still troubling about this ancient people. How did this civilization come into this area and dominate its culture. To discuss this, researchers have looked at both artifacts and language source materials.

Archaeological Evidence

Archaeologist seek to discern the differences between cultures and understand that different civilizations of an area in its timeline. To do this, they look at the material objects, understanding that many times people will share objects from culture to culture. Thus, they can link a connection between two cultures if they share something, such as pottery. They other thing is that archaeologist will give names to different cultures, but those names are for our sake and do not have to represent a people rightly.

Hassuna Culture

Hassuna culture is the earliest major culture in northern Mesopotamia during the period of 5500-5000 BC. The Hassuna people were primarily agricultural people and makers of pottery. They had some tools that were made of bone and stone, but the most common tool they used was a wooden stick with flint teeth for harvesting grain. The Hassuna culture was not completely restricted to themselves, but they have been found to trade with nations miles away on the coast.

Halaf Culture

Around 5000 BC the Hassuna culture was replaced by the Halaf which lasted until 4100 BC. The Halaf people developed very beautiful pottery that is copied from metallic vessels which show that they were a metal working people by this time. This supports the assumption that they were of the first people to use metal in the world.

Halaf civilization was much more advanced than most people in the world. Their cities had paved streets and homes with more than one room. They also had a developed religious system. But strangely, their civilization disappeared. Some have thought that maybe the flood was the cause of this, but the flood would have come much earlier than this. Rather, invasion or natural disasters are the most probable explanations.

Ubaid Culture

The Ubaid culture existed in the southern part of Mesopotamia near the Persian Gulf. This area is known as Sumer; and Shinar in the Bible. This region was not settled prior to 6000 BC. Its earliest cities came around 5600 BC. The Ubaid culture is best known for its increased use of metals and the invention of the wheel.

Uruk Culture

The Uruk culture lasted from 3750-3200 BC. This period is best known for its development in brick baking for monumental buildings. They discovered that if you bake the bricks, their strength is better and it is better to build monumental buildings. Thus, they were the first to create the first great temples. Another major advancement was their invention of the boat.

Proto-Literate Period

The proto-literate period was from 3200-3100 BC. The major advancement during this period was the invention of writing. This was so important because it allowed for records to be kept and then later discovered. Another advancement was irrigation which shows that by this time there was some degree of political organization and unification.

Literary Evidence

The writing developed during this period was cuneiform. What is strange about this early writings was that the language of these Sumerians was very distinct, but they had proper names that did not fit the language. This means there had to be an earlier people, though no artifacts are there to support it.

The “Sumerian Problem”

The Sumerian Problem has to do with the differences between the findings of archeologist and philologist. The archeologist, basing their argument on artifacts, argue that there have been one people living in the area. The philologist, basing their argument on language, argue that there have been different people living in the area because of the differences in languages.

A Biblical Answer

Though there does not seem to be a solution to this problem, the Bible has a very plausible answer. The answer that it gives is the judgment of God seen in the tower of Babel. We know that the ziggurats were starting to be built around this time and the tower of Babel appears to be a ziggurat. This answers the problem because archeologist tells us no one new came into the area during this time. It also makes since of the philologist’s arguments who claim that the languages changed. In fact, they did.

The Confusion of Language in Mesopotamia Tradition

This is further supported by different traditions such as “The Spell of Nudimmud” which speaks of a golden age when everyone spoke one language. It claims that a Babylonian god destroyed a temple and confused the speech of the builders. There is a strong connection between this tradition and the biblical account because of the word translated confounded. In conclusion, the biblical account answers the problems seen in the historical problem and should therefore be take seriously.

King Solomon in His Ancient Content

The Book of Kings tells the history of the kings of Israel. Dating this ancient book is difficult, but we can know it came at least before 200 BC when it was translated into Greek. The last recorded event is the elevation of Jehoiachin to the table of Awel-Marduk in 562 BC. However, the book tells of events happening in the time of Solomon dating back to 950 BC. Therefore, do the reports of Solomon come from accurate tradition or folklore? There is no doubt that the author was influenced by his theology, but that itself is not reason to assume his statements are factual.

The Cultural Context

The Solomon narrative tells in great detail about the sort of things Solomon’s craftsman made. Therefore, one thing to research first is to see if this sort of work was around in the tenth century.

The Use of Gold. It is clear that the building style of Solomon’s temple fits that of the tenth century with a porch, main hall, and sanctuary. Almost all of Solomon’s buildings and relationships fit this time period. However, most commentators reject the lavishness of the temple. They argue that even Ezekiel did not know of all the gold plating. Some argue that the removing of gold that comes later in Kings is evidence that the gold was never there. Others say that it might have been sprayed on, but not to the degree that Kings reports. There is tons of evidence that this was normal during this time. Mesopotamian resources claim to do the same thing over and over. Even the Egyptians are reported as doing this.

Even Solomon’s vessels and throne are reported as being made of gold. This appears to be a normal thing all through the near east. Golden vessels were expected in royal homes. Solomon’s throne does not have to be made of pure ivory, but it was a common phrase when a part of it was made with it. And this was a common practice of the time.

Amounts of Gold. Since we can understand Solomon using gold in this way, what can be said about the amount? Most would say it is impossible for it to be true. However, there is plenty of evidence of this much gold changing hands in ancient times. When kings would conquer people, it was customary for large amounts of gold to go from one to another. Egypt was rich with gold. So much so that some considered it to have gold like dust. This shows that it was customary to have exaggerated amounts of gold.

Sources of Gold. Another question then becomes could an Israelite king get that much gold. Egypt had her gold supply. Israel did not. The Bible reports that Solomon traded for gold from those who had access to it.

Palace Provisions. Another questioned account of the Solomon narrative are the provisions he required. However, this was not uncommon for the Babylonians and Egyptians. Sargon of Akkad boasted of 5,400 men eating at his table. Ashurnasirpal II of Assyria had a ten day feast for 69,574 people requiring a great deal of provisions.

The Archaeological Context

Another issue that arises is that there have been archaeological finds from that time, but they seem to be much more modest than what is reported. However, this should not be surprising given the number of times it has been burnt to the ground and rebuilt. When Herod did his renovations, it is possible that he wiped away all that remained of Solomon’s temple. We might be able to see the richness of Solomon by the way out lying cities lived. It would make since that as the kingdom grew, other cities would share in the richness.

Another question is why have no inscriptions of Solomon been found well, the fact that his palace was used by many kings makes since that his name would not be found in it. This should also not be too shocking since only sixteen out of one hundred-thirteen kings between 1000 and 600 BC have been discovered by inscriptions. And sadly, Israel did most of her writing on papyrus and not stone like others around them.

The Historical Context

The fact that Solomon does not appear in any of the written text of other kingdoms also cause problems for some. However, this problem is wide spread because we have very little documents from that time. There are no Assyrian or Babylonian records from that time. The Arameans did not start keeping records until the middle of the ninth century. Solomon’s ally, Tyre, have no records until the eighth century. Egypt only has a handful of inscriptions during this time. In reality, what we see with Solomon is normal for this time with many other kings.

The Nature of the Hebrew History Book

There is nothing else like the Hebrew history book in the entire ancient Near East. It tells both of the success and failure of Israel and her kings. Like other nations, it ascribes victory and defeat at the will of God. The Assyrians and Babylonians were also record keepers and we can assume that the writer of Kings used such works of Israel’s past to complete his work. Though it is filled with talk of God, this does not mean that it is not reliable. When checked against other sources, it has been found to be very accurate. Others argue that it is weak because of its lack of information about other nations. However, this is a weak argument because the author did not feel that it was necessary for the readers to understand. Others see differences between the Hebrew and Septuagint and claim that Kings was not a book by this time. Though it is possible that the writing might still be a little fluid, most study seems to show that it was a set book.

Conclusion

The Solomon Narrative can be a trusted source for the history of Israel based on what we know about the ancient Near East. Solomon acted like kings around him. Though his wealth and power are reason for some to skepticism, there are no obstacles in reading the Hebrew text the way it is written. From the side of scholarship, we have no reason to doubt the Bible’s claims about Solomon’s reign.

Moses and Hatshepsut

A major question that has perplexed man is, “Who was pharaoh during the Exodus”. Out of all the study of this, there are two time periods where scholars seem to come down on. Either it happened in the 15^th century or 13^th century B.C. Where someone comes down on this has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative. Many on both sides come down on either. However, the late date is the one most accepted by scholars, the early date is the one most supported by a clear reading of the Bible. Late daters arguer that there is no evidence of Israel in Canaan this early. But LoMusio argued that Moses lived in the 18^th Dynasty and this paper will discuss and strengthen his thoughts.

The 18^th Dynasty

Taking the date from the Bible, Moses would have been born during the reign of Thutmosis I and would have chartered the Exodus during the reign of Amenhotep. Thutmosis I did not have a son by his legitimate wife, but did have a daughter, Hatshepsut. Thus, Thutmosis II had to marry his half sister for religious rights to the throne. Hatshepsut was probably around 6 when Moses would have been born. When Thutmosis II died, Hatshepsut took the throne and held it till her death.

Moses, Hatshepsut and Dynasty 18

We are told from the Bible that Pharaoh’s daughter was the one who saved him from the river. We know that she had slaves and attendants and must have been a powerful woman to command people to do her bidding. Hatshepsut could very well be the daughter that the Bible speaks about. This also corresponds with the 18^th century tradition of identifying royal daughters as “pharaoh’s daughter”. Of all of Hatshepsut’s siblings, she was the only one alive and could be the only one to carry such a title.

When the pharaoh’s daughter found the boy, she had him returned to his mother, unknowingly, and Moses could have been with his family for years. This may be why he was empathetic towards the Hebrew who was being beaten. If this was the case, Moses would have been raised in the harem and taught like an Egyptian which makes since of Acts 7:22. When Hatshepsut died, her memory was erased from Egypt. This would make since if her son, Thutmosis III had to wait so long to become pharaoh.

A Chronology of Moses and Dynasty 18

The Bible says that Moses left Egypt when he was forty and that would mean right before Thutmosis took over. It could be that Thutmosis was afraid of Moses and it was good reason for Moses to get out of Egypt. We can also know that Thutmosis III was a builder and that would fit neatly with the biblical narrative.

Moses and the Pharaoh

Moses returned to Egypt to speak with Pharaoh after Thutmosis III had died and his son Amenhotep II has become king. This would have been about three or four years into his reign. The question is how could have Moses gained access to the Pharaoh, but being that he was his uncle-in-law, it makes since. Exodus says that Moses was even received well by Egyptians officials (11:3). So we see how Moses fits well into this dynasty.

Dynasty 18 and Dynasty 19 Compared

We can see why many people think the 19^th Dynasty is the dynasty of the Exodus because of the name Ramses, but the problem is that there is no strong woman like Hatshepsut. Another problem is that if Ramses II was Pharaoh, which most who hold to the late date do, this would mean that Moses was born in the previous dynasty and it is unlikely that a royal member of the previous dynasty would be aloud in the 19^th Dynasty. To fix this they must try to put Moses’ departure under Ramses’ reign but that does not fit the biblical account because God told him the one who threatened him was dead. Even the date of when Ramses’ son invaded Palestine and faced Israel does not make since with the biblical account.

Summary

Even though this cannot be proved 100%, it is very interesting how the events line up with the early date. The fact that “pharaoh’s daughter” caries that she should be a woman of power does not match up with the late date, but fits the early date very well. It may never be certain when the Exodus took place, but the data seems to match the early date more so than the late.

The Historical Study of Scripture: The Date of the Exodus

The dating of the Exodus has proven to be a difficult study in biblical scholarship with two main views. These difficulties really came to the forefront with the rise of modern historical research in the 19^th century. These methods changed the way people looked at the Bible. Historians ask the question, “What really happened”, but know that they will never really know. No longer is Scripture seen as the authoritative truth, but the artifacts tell the truth. Sometimes these artifacts supported the Bible, other times went against it. In regard to the Exodus, some find the facts pointing towards a later date while the Bible itself points to an early date.

The Early Date

Biblical Support for a 15^th Century Date (1440 BC). For some the Bible is the primary source of information on the matter. But this does not come without difficulties. First, is the Bible more concerned with data or myth? Second, we can tell that the Bible is more concerned about Israel’s relationship with God than it is with just telling history. Can it be trusted then? Third, another problem is that the Bible seems to contradict itself at places; so if you just take the Bible for what it says, what do you do when it disagrees? Therefore Dennis Bratcher thinks the Bible offers very little aid.

1 Kings 6:1 is the primary passage where the early date gets its credit. Early date people take the Bible’s claim of 480 years literally, but that is because of a misunderstood way of ancient dating. Such scientific methods of dating are relatively new. So many scholars think that this is meant to be an estimate and not a literal number. They say it is better to understand it as twelve generation at twenty-five years each equaling 300 years placing the date at 1260 BC, the late date.

Judges 11:26 also supports an early date. Jephthah in a dispute with the Ammomites said that Israel had been in the land for 300 years which shows for the early date. But some argue that Jephthah was not meaning to give an exact date, but is bulking up his argument. They also make him out to be an idiot who has no clue to history. They argue that there is no reason to assume this is accurate. Plus, they argue that the whole period of the Judges has bad dating so we cannot take it as accurate.

Historical Support for a 15^th Century Date (1440 BC). Since there is no literature from this period to support an exodus, artifacts give the only information we have. Jericho was thought to have been destroyed in 1400 BC which supported an early date. However, later findings support otherwise. Another city is Hazor which has destruction found in 1400 BC, but scholars say there is no reason to assume it was caused by Israelites.

Logical Support for a 15^th Century Date (1440 BC). Late daters argue that we should not think of Moses’ life divisions as actual. When three numbers are the same in the Bible, we should not assume they are real. Another argument for the early date is that a stele from Egypt says that there was a battle with them. The argument goes that they would have had to been in the land by this time. This does not work with the late date. But some think they could have been in the land long enough even with the late date. Another argument for the early date is the length of the day of the judges. However, late daters argue that this is not good enough because the lengths of each cannot be trusted and it is not known if they overlap. Thus, there is no logical reason to assume an early date.

The Late Date

Biblical Support for a 13^th Century Date (1290 BC). There is really no Scriptural support for a late date. The reason so much attention has been paid to the information above is to show that the Bible does not need to be trusted.

Historical Support for a 13^th Century Date (1290 BC). A historical argument for the late date is that there is little evidence of people living in the region of Moab and Edom during the time of the conquest. There has been a city found from that time, but late daters says there is no reason to assume that it was involved during the conquest.

Logical Support for a 13^th Century Date (1290 BC). Late daters argue that there is no way that Egyptians could have allowed Joseph to rise to the power that he did. Therefore they argue that he would have had to become powerful during the Hyksos rule in eastern Egypt. They also make many assumptions based on the name Rameses. Israel built a store city under that name and late daters argue that they would not have been able to do that before Pharaoh Rameses. We also see that Egypt invaded the land during the late 14^th to mid 13^th century. The Bible speaks nothing of this, and therefore logically it can be assumed that it could not have been with Israel.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we see that neither position is overly strong. The early date places to much weight on the Scriptures and late daters place to much weight on artifacts. In the end, we cannot know which is right. Therefore, we should think of the Exodus from a more theological perspective and see what it meant for the early readers more so than thinking it was just for us.