| Revision as of 21:37, 28 January 2006 editBradeos Graphon (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users24,172 edits {{cleanup|January 2006}} This is more of an essay than an article← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:39, 28 January 2006 edit undoBradeos Graphon (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users24,172 editsm We already have History of ancient Israel and JudahNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{merge|History of ancient Israel and Judah}} | |||
| {{cleanup|January 2006}} | {{cleanup|January 2006}} | ||
| 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. | 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. | ||
Revision as of 21:39, 28 January 2006
 | It has been suggested that this article be merged with History of ancient Israel and Judah. (Discuss) |
You must add a |reason= parameter to this Cleanup template – replace it with {{Cleanup|January 2006|reason=<Fill reason here>}}, or remove the Cleanup template.
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 Second Intermediate Period 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.