SkipCaptcha
1,101
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 31:
Line 31: − − == Chronological Placement of the Exodus == − − [[James Ussher]], in ''[[The Annals of the World]]'', placed the Exodus at 1491 BC. His primary assumptions consisted of: − − # Accepting 562 BC as the death of [[Nebuchadnezzar II]]. − # A direct reckoning of the dates-of-accession of the Kings of the Divided Kingdoms [[Northern Kingdom|Northern]] and [[Southern Kingdom|Southern]]. − # The Bible's explicit statement that [[Solomon]] broke ground on the [[Temple of Jerusalem]] exactly 479 years after the Exodus.<ref name=Groundbreak>{{Bible ref|book=I_Kings|chap=6|verses-1}}</ref> − − Today Ussher's original [[Date of the Exodus|date]] is sharply [[Biblical chronology dispute|contested]]. The three contenders for the date of the Exodus are: − − # 1491 BC (Ussher) − # 1445-1446 BC ("The Early Date") − # 1290 BC ("The Late Date") − − Virtually all of the arguments for the Late Date rest solely on arguments from conventional [[Egyptian chronology]], however. The Early Date is much better supported from Scripture, which specifically requires four hundred eighty years between the Exodus and the groundbreaking of the [[Temple]] built by [[Solomon]].<ref name=Groundbreak/> Several archaeologists have looked for battle-damage and other evidence for the Early Date in and around [[Jericho]], [[Ai]], and [[Hazor]], and have found it.<ref>Lorenzini, D. Massimiliano. "[http://www.angelfire.com/nm/massimolorenzini/exodus.html Evidence for the Early Date of the Exodus]." 2002. Retrieved July 8, 2007.</ref> − − The date preferred by [[Edwin R. Thiele]] (labeled "Early Date" above) is only forty-five years later than Ussher's. Thiele's sole warrant for favoring his date over Ussher's is his attempt to reconcile the king lists of the Divided Kingdoms [[Northern Kingdom|Northern]] and [[Southern Kingdom|Southern]] with the [[chronology]] of the [[Assyrian chronology|Assyrians]]. (For a detailed discussion, and a synoptic table showing the differing results for those king lists, see [[Biblical chronology dispute|here]].) Thiele, like Ussher, relies on the Temple groundbreaking interval described above to assign his date for the Exodus. − − The Pharaoh of the Oppression, as stated above, was likely Sesostris III, a Twelfth Dynasty king. [[James Ussher]] initially supposed that the Pharaoh of the Exodus was not Ramesses II, but ''another'' Ramesses whom he mistakenly assumed ruled directly before Ramesses II and for the same number of years. Future scholars accepted Seti I and Ramesses II as the Pharaohs of the Oppression and Exodus, respectively, for decades. Recently, some scholars tried to make a case for other pairings of the Pharaohs of the Oppression and Exodus in the Eighteenth Dynasty rather than the Nineteenth. These included: − − # [[Thutmose III]] and [[Amenhotep II]] − # [[Thutmose I]] and [[Thutmose III]]. These scholars also identified Pharaoh's daughter as [[Hatshepsut]], the first woman ever to rule as Pharaoh in her own right. − − Still other scholars have attempted to identify Moses with Amenhotep IV, also known as [[Akhenaton]], the "heretical Pharaoh" who tried to install a crude form of monotheism in his empire. However, a more likely scenario is that the actual Akhenaton took inspiration from Moses, though his understanding of Moses' religion was thoroughly mistaken. −
Undo revision 1336043 by Korvex (talk)
*''The Biblical statement of Exodus 1:11 is supposed to place the event at 1290 B.C.'' This verse reads ''"...and they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses"'', possibly indicating the reign of Rameses II during this time. The fact that the site of the city of Raamses was only called that from 1300 to 100 B.C. is not a settled argument in favor of the earlier date, as the site previously was known as "Zoan-Avaris" where the Israelites had served as slaves years before. Zoan-Avaris also flourished before the Hyksos were driven out at approximately 1570 B.C., leaving plenty of time for the Hebrew slaves to have built the earlier city after they arrived in c. 1870 B.C. during the time of Joseph (Unger, pg. 333).
*''The Biblical statement of Exodus 1:11 is supposed to place the event at 1290 B.C.'' This verse reads ''"...and they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses"'', possibly indicating the reign of Rameses II during this time. The fact that the site of the city of Raamses was only called that from 1300 to 100 B.C. is not a settled argument in favor of the earlier date, as the site previously was known as "Zoan-Avaris" where the Israelites had served as slaves years before. Zoan-Avaris also flourished before the Hyksos were driven out at approximately 1570 B.C., leaving plenty of time for the Hebrew slaves to have built the earlier city after they arrived in c. 1870 B.C. during the time of Joseph (Unger, pg. 333).
*''The earlier date of the Exodus is disputed by evidence from Transjordan, Debir, and Lachish.'' The explorations of archaeologist Nelson Gleck demonstrated a gap in the population of this region between 1900-1300 B.C., which according to Gleck indicated that had the Israelites came up from Egypt during the Exodus, they would not have met the Amorites, Moabites, and Edomites which resisted their journey. However, there is nothing in the ''Exodus'' story demanding more than a simple, farming economy which left behind little to no evidence for the archaeologist, nor is there any evidence found at Lachish and Debir sufficient enough to set aside the ''Exodus'' narrative. (Unger, pp. 333-334)
*''The earlier date of the Exodus is disputed by evidence from Transjordan, Debir, and Lachish.'' The explorations of archaeologist Nelson Gleck demonstrated a gap in the population of this region between 1900-1300 B.C., which according to Gleck indicated that had the Israelites came up from Egypt during the Exodus, they would not have met the Amorites, Moabites, and Edomites which resisted their journey. However, there is nothing in the ''Exodus'' story demanding more than a simple, farming economy which left behind little to no evidence for the archaeologist, nor is there any evidence found at Lachish and Debir sufficient enough to set aside the ''Exodus'' narrative. (Unger, pp. 333-334)
==References==
==References==