| Revision as of 21:33, 28 January 2006 editDas Baz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,363 editsNo edit summary | Revision as of 21:34, 28 January 2006 edit undoDas Baz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,363 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Ancient Israelite History begins with the ] of the ] from ]. Unfortunately, this event and its ] are much-debated mysteries. It has long been believed that the Exodus took place in the reign of ], but there is no evidence in the archaeological or textual record that Egypt suffered from any major ] during the rule of this monarch, or that there was any mass escape of enslaved Asians at this time. This means that either: a) The Exodus narrative is largely mythological and fictitious; or b) The Pharaoh of the Exodus must have been another king, not Ramses II. Currently most scholars opt for the first of these. Those who prefer the |
Ancient Israelite History begins with the ] of the ] from ]. Unfortunately, this event and its ] are much-debated mysteries. It has long been believed that the Exodus took place in the reign of ], but there is no evidence in the archaeological or textual record that Egypt suffered from any major ] during the rule of this monarch, or that there was any mass escape of enslaved Asians at this time. This means that either: a) The Exodus narrative is largely mythological and fictitious; or b) The Pharaoh of the Exodus must have been another king, not Ramses II. Currently most scholars opt for the first of these. Those who prefer the second option believe the Pharaoh of the Exodus may have been ] or ]. Tutimaios was the last Pharaoh of the ]. His reign ended in disaster and confusion, with the collapse of the Egyptian nation. The ] ensued.In every way. Tutimaios makes a much better candidate than Ramses II for the Pharaoh of the Exodus. | ||
| After leaving Egypt and wandering in the desert for a generation, the Israelites invaded the land of ], destroying major Canaanite cities such as ] and ]. The paradigm that has Ramses II as Exodus Pharaoh also has the conquest of Canaan and the destruction of Jericho and other Canaanite cities around ]. However, around this time Jericho was an unimportant site, with no great defensive walls such as those crucial to the Conquest narrative. The options are the same as before: Either dismiss the Biblical narrative as mythological and fictitious, or else consider the Conquest as having taken place at a time when Jericho had great walls that were destroyed by an earthquake, a time when the walled cities of Canaan were destroyed. This happened at a time close to the beginning of the ] of Egypt. | After leaving Egypt and wandering in the desert for a generation, the Israelites invaded the land of ], destroying major Canaanite cities such as ] and ]. The paradigm that has Ramses II as Exodus Pharaoh also has the conquest of Canaan and the destruction of Jericho and other Canaanite cities around ]. However, around this time Jericho was an unimportant site, with no great defensive walls such as those crucial to the Conquest narrative. The options are the same as before: Either dismiss the Biblical narrative as mythological and fictitious, or else consider the Conquest as having taken place at a time when Jericho had great walls that were destroyed by an earthquake, a time when the walled cities of Canaan were destroyed. This happened at a time close to the beginning of the ] of Egypt. | ||
Revision as of 21:34, 28 January 2006
Ancient Israelite History begins with the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. Unfortunately, this event and its chronology are much-debated mysteries. It has long been believed that the Exodus took place in the reign of Ramses II, but there is no evidence in the archaeological or textual record that Egypt suffered from any major natural disasters during the rule of this monarch, or that there was any mass escape of enslaved Asians at this time. This means that either: a) The Exodus narrative is largely mythological and fictitious; or b) The Pharaoh of the Exodus must have been another king, not Ramses II. Currently most scholars opt for the first of these. Those who prefer the second option believe the Pharaoh of the Exodus may have been Akhenaton or Tutimaios. Tutimaios was the last Pharaoh of the Thirteenth Dynasty. His reign ended in disaster and confusion, with the collapse of the Egyptian nation. The ] ensued.In every way. Tutimaios makes a much better candidate than Ramses II for the Pharaoh of the Exodus.
After leaving Egypt and wandering in the desert for a generation, the Israelites invaded the land of Canaan, destroying major Canaanite cities such as Jericho and Hazor. The paradigm that has Ramses II as Exodus Pharaoh also has the conquest of Canaan and the destruction of Jericho and other Canaanite cities around 1200 BCE. However, around this time Jericho was an unimportant site, with no great defensive walls such as those crucial to the Conquest narrative. The options are the same as before: Either dismiss the Biblical narrative as mythological and fictitious, or else consider the Conquest as having taken place at a time when Jericho had great walls that were destroyed by an earthquake, a time when the walled cities of Canaan were destroyed. This happened at a time close to the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period of Egypt.