Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Who was the Pharoah during the Exodus?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who was the Pharoah during the Exodus?
Menkaure
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Ramesses II
10%
 10%  [ 1 ]
Amenhotep II
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
someone else
30%
 30%  [ 3 ]
I don't believe the story of Exodus
60%
 60%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 10

Author Message
Naunacht
Priest
Priest


Joined: 06 Oct 2009
Posts: 515
Location: U.S. NJ

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a little more fuel to throw on the fire.

A possible reference to Israel around 200 years before the Merneptah stela.
http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/ancient-Israel/does-the-merneptah-stele-contain-the-first-mention-of-Israel/?mqsc=E3033357

Unfortunately not too many details here but if true it probably rules out the Ramesside date.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ptahshepses
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 21 Jan 2012
Posts: 41
Location: Hampshire, UK

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meretseger wrote:
BTW Exodus describes the enslaved Hebrews making mudbricks, in fact it's quite a plot point. The Gizamids are not made of mudbrick - but the Ramesside cities would have been.


None of the old kingdom pyramids had mudbrick - although some of the mortuary temples that were finished in a hurry were completed with mudbrick. Allegedly.
I say that because there is nothing to say that the mudbrick is contemporary, it may have been used as part of a renovation at a later date.

However, the pyramids of the Middle Kingdom most certainly were of mudbrick
Everything I've read has made me believe that the 'Exodus' did not happen once, but twice.
If the Asiatics, or Hebrew tribes, were part of the immigrants of the Middle Kingdom, they would have been asked to provide labour under the Corvee Labour system that every Egyptian citizen had an obligation to contribute to. If this is true, then they may well have been told to make mud bricks for pyramids and the only question is, was it slave labour if everyone had to contribute?

If they were part of that group, who then became known as the 'heqa khauset' (The Hyksos), then they were driven out of Egypt in the late 17th/early 18th dynasty. That would have been expulsion No.1

Illegal immigrants who refused to abide by Egyptian law and supply grain to the Royal Granaries happened a second time after Akhanaten failed to maintain his borders.
That would be the second expulsion, happening about 1200BC when Seti, Ram2 and Merenptah drove them out and took the fight to Libya and the Levant. They obviously had to fight the 'Sea People' alliance at some point and managed to turn the Sherden into mercenaries, much as they had turned the Medjay.

It's possible that the two stories have become one. The 'slave labour' is Corvee labour and the leaving the country has become an Exodus, instead of being forced out.
Over time the Reed Sea has become the Red Sea, 616 has become 666, the 'Hymn to Aten' has become Psalm 104, and it all leads me to believe that the Exodus did not happen as written.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3753
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naunacht wrote:
... A possible reference to Israel around 200 years before the Merneptah stela.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/ancient-Israel/does-the-merneptah-stele-contain-the-first-mention-of-Israel/?mqsc=E3033357

Unfortunately not too many details here but if true it probably rules out the Ramesside date.

For the link to the complete articels about this see some posts of mine in : Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens -> Battle of Megiddo (Tuthmosis III) -> Page 3 -> Sun May 15, 2011.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
peaceharris
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 23 Jun 2011
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:43 am    Post subject: brick Reply with quote

The word brick need not necessarily refer to mudbrick alone, but could also refer to any synthetic cast rock (as opposed to natural stone)

The Hebrew word for brick לְבֵנִים, found in Exodus 1 is also found in Genesis 11. (See http://concordances.org/hebrew/3843.htm )

Genesis 11:3 reads: They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly. They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar”

This verse suggests that only after the tower of Babel event did people start to use synthetic cast and baked bricks, instead of natural stone.

Joseph Davidovits has given some evidences to prove that the limestone blocks used to build the Great pyramids are cast limestone and not natural limestone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3753
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:48 pm    Post subject: Re: brick Reply with quote

peaceharris wrote:
... Joseph Davidovits has given some evidences to prove that the limestone blocks used to build the Great pyramids are cast limestone and not natural limestone.

Clearly been refuted and also therefore absurd, since the blocks contain inclusions of complete prehistoric fossils. The quarries from which the blocks come from are long identified (see the works by Dietrich and Rosemarie Klemm, for example the newest one : The stones of the pyramids - Provenance of the building stones of the Old Kingdom pyramids of Egypt. - Berlin : de Gruyter, 2010. - ISBN : 978-3-11-022123-7. - V, 167 p.).

By the way (and again and again), the Bible is a book of believe not a history book.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is and it isn't a history book. It does tell the history of God's dealings with his Chosen People - according to the traditions of that same people but Genesis consists of origin myths which are best read as parables and Exodus is as highly mythologized as the Illiad. The latter almost certainly has some historical basis but the former is much more dubious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 3753
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Meretseger wrote:
It is and it isn't a history book. It does tell the history of God's dealings with his Chosen People ...

If you believe that there is a God who plays such absurd games with his alleged "chosen people" as they are described in the first five books. If you are not believe (surprise : I do not) then the so called Pentateuch is a collection of fairy tales and legends, in there majority probably originally derived from the Mesopotamian area and by about 800-500 B.C. probably still in Babylon brought by the Hebrew priests in the present known written version.

Probably it was there try to preserve power over and identity for there people. In order to create a separate, possibly heroic and extraordinary history they used also what was available in the fundus : the myths and legends of neighboring peoples. Through the interweaving of real places and countries as a locus of action is historicity fooled.

The Delta and the Nile Valley were since prehistoric times, especially in times of hardship and hunger, for the surrounding tribes and peoples a place of refuge and hope. But this is no clear scientific evidence for any event described in the five books of Moses. It is still true that no event and no person from the five books of Moses are outside the latter archaeologically provable (and also more than 200 years digging of so-called biblical archaeologists could not change that). Therefore, it is (and not just for me) no history book, just a book with stories and of course with its own history.

Lutz

Book recommendation :

Israel Finkelstein and Neil A. Silberman :

The Bible Unearthed - Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Isreal and the Origin of Sacred Texts (New York : Simon and Schuster, 2001)
David and Solomon - In search of the Bible's sacred kings and the roots of the Western tradition (New York : Simon and Schuster, 2006).

Alessandra Nibbi : Canaan and Canaanite in Ancient Egypt. - Oxford : DE Publications, 1989. - ISBN : 0-9510704-4-4. - 128 p.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes of course. I was trying to explain the intent of the Pentateuch. The Writers INTENT was to create a history of Israel's dealings with God meaning that ACTUAL historical traditions would have been used as well as origin myths drawn from the Mesopotamian milieu. Thus they were in fact histories of a sort. And let us remember that objective history was millenia in the future well into the Modern Era 'histories' were written with an unapologetic bias.

With all allowances made for this bias I see no good reason to completely disregard any people's own writings about themselves and their history. Nor is this usually done - except of course in the case of the Bible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobManske
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here we go again for the eight hundred billionth time. We have been through this same topic on this forum over and over and over and over again until we puke and then here comes another exodus vs. history yoyo.

I cannot understand why threads like this aren't locked. That's up to Kevin, of course. It's his forum and I have to respect his judgement. Nevertheless, locked or unlocked, nothing is gained by this, particularly not when it's cast in the form of a poll.

Now we see the same old people harping at each other yet again for the same damned old reasons. It gets into the same personality issues as the race issues, complete with accusations, unfounded inferences, etc. And here we go again. People are going to wind up hating each other all over again, making personality judgements, everything bad. This is a sickening thread, it is not founded on an interest in fact-finding nor is it a request for further information. Starting this thread was not a good idea, nothing is going to be determined.

Please lock it, please, before it gets out of hand again.
_________________
In the beginning the universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
- Douglas Adams

Good bye, Doug, thanks a lot, and you're welcome for all the fish. Stop by our way again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Pharaohs and Queens All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group