Moses, Hebrews leaving Egypt, etc. - backed up by other histories?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Tree ring seems like a good way to calibrate it.  But is that accurate? Don't trees only live a few hundred years?

Yeah, but you can build a chronology using multiple trees from the same area and the size of the growth rings of each.

Apparently any carbon dating in this region is disputed by 100 -150 years due to volcanic activity that affected carbon levels.

Yup, besides ending Minoan civilization, Thera caused a major disruption for radiocarbon dating by releasing a fair amount of non-radioactive carbon into the environment.  Problem is, Thera's eruption absolutely predates the Eighteenth dynasty.  Pumice identified as coming from Thera has been found at Avaris in layers predating the destruction of the city by Ahmose I.  (Avaris had been the capital of the XVIIth Dynasty.) That city of Avaris was later rebuilt under the XIXth Dynasty as the city of Pi-Ramesses mentioned in Exodus 1.  Incidentally, that's another reason that no attempt to treat Exodus as literal history can support an XVIIIth Dynasty exodus.

[color1]

Besides the skin lesions/boils on 3 generatons of Pharaohs, Thutmose III ( not the first born of Thutmose II - implies the real first born died & secretly subsituted for: Passover; Exodus implies the first borns in Pharaoh's house died during Passover),  We have genetic evidence (specific gene markers)  for the House of Cohen (priests directly form Aaron, Moses' brother).  [[Supports Exodus of Bible]

There seems to be a trail of Joshua conquest around 1430 BC (Jericho, Hazor, Ai(of Khirbet el-Maqatir). We have Israel type houses that follow the Egyptian floor/home plans directly from Avaris Egypt in the Nile delta; the worship of ONE God entering in Caanan/Palestine. [[Supports Joshua of the Bible]]

So there is evidence outside of the Bible for God's plagues against Egypt (skin lesions), Passover death of first born of Egypt including Pharaoh's house (Thutmose III the GREAT was not related to Thutmose II, so the real Thutmose III nust have died & secretly replaced).

There is evidence of great turmoil in Egypt around the time of Thutmose II thru Akenhanten: a women becomes Pharaoh, rejection of most of Egypt's gods by a Pharaoh.

Evidence buildiing for Joshua's Conquest of Caanan building: Jericho, Hazor, Ai near 1400 - 1500 BC.  Strong gentic markers for the house of Cohen (Aaron - Moses's brother). Through the genetic markers, one has evidence for Moses.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Another problem is, if you date the Israelite exodus of the promised land to the Eighteenth Dynasty, you're placing it a couple of centuries before the iron age begins, and the Book of Joshua mentions them facing enemies with chariots of iron several times.  So an Eighteenth Dynasty exodus requires that the Bible contains factual errors of history which sorta defeats the point of trying to use specific points of the historical record to prove the authenticity of the Bible.

All the genetic markers you mention support is that the kohens have a common patrilineal ancestor, but provides absolutely no support as to who that ancestor is.

[color1]

The Cohen (house of Aaron, all trace their lineage from Aaron and as being priests of God from the Exodus days).  The DNA strongly supports their historical claim of one common male ancestor Aaron.  And if Aaron existed from Exodus days, then his brother the Bible claims is Moses.  That supports the claim for the existence of Moses and that the Biblical record is probably true.

From my perspective, a supernatural element can be seen here. 1) Egyptian mummification and the protection of Pharaoh mummies preserved the evidence for the Biblical plague; 2) the Pharaohs were preserved and the lineage texts/with children to know that Thutmose III was the first born of Thutmose II -- but the DNA of Pharaoh Thutmose III confirms that his father was NOT Thutmose II (he was a secret substitution). This supports the Biblical claim that even the god Pharaoh suffered loss of his first born at the Passover ( think of it, what are the odds that evidence exists today for the Passover???!!! - yet it does).  3)The other is that the kohens/Cohens (a derivative of Aaron claim they are the priestly line from Exodus days).  The DNA markers strongly backup their claim that they all descended from Aaron as priests from Exodus days. And if Aaron existed from Exodus days, the that gives credence to Moses the brother of Aaron being an actual historical figure from Exodus days.

To me the earliest Israelite homes being exactly like the homes from Egyptian Avaris (just before the time of the Exodus 1500 BCE) and TOTALLY different Caanan homes is PROOF for the Exodus.  The French excavators know that Avaris, in the Nile delta, was home to semetic  peoples.  The Bible says the Hebrews/Israelite settled in the Nile Delta.  The Israelites brought belief in the ONE God to the Levant/Palestine/Caanan.

I think they have discovered that the Iron age began a couple hundred years earlier than previously thought. There is evidence that the iron age started a couple hundred years earlier - preliminary findings(?). So let's wait for more evidence.  I think I read that somewhere in 2012 that the Hittites had iron earlier.

""Where or when such knowledge was first acquired would be difficult to pinpoint.  There is evidence that it [iron] was first used in the Zagros Mountains of what is now western Iran after 3500 B.C.""

Once again everything points to around 3430 BC (1430 BC) : destruction of Caananite cities carbon dating, the iron age existing with Hittiles.

  From my perspective, there is enough "outside" evidence to support the Biblical claims of plagues, Passover (Exodus), entering/conquering Caanan, priesthood & laws beginning during Exodus days (Cohans historical claim- dna to Aaron).

[color1]

Before Archeology found the "Hittites" the Bible said they existed (another reason the Bible could not be trusted to be historically accurate they said). 

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There are occasional iron artifacts before the Iron Age proper, but it wasn't until the Bronze Age Collapse caused the interruption of the tin trade that the use of the more expensive iron took place at the levels needed to develop it as a widely useful metal.

[color1]

I remember correctly they found a chariot/wheel made with remenant of iron some where in Syria about 200 -300 years earlier than before.  That's if my memory is right.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

While the Anatolians seem to have entered the Iron Age earlier than their neighbors, the archeological record places their entry as having occurred in the Nineteenth Dynasty, with iron use becoming more widespread in the Twentieth.  Certainly not early to middle Eighteenth Dynasty as would be needed to reconcile the presence of iron chariots in Joshua with the idea that Thutmose II was the pharaoh of the exodus.

[color1]

Would 200 years earlier solve all issues Ernest?

"bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-01-51.html""


""The entire Iron Age sequence is now thought to be much earlier than previously thought, with some levels being re-dated by up to two hundred years.

The destruction of the monumental Early Phrygian citadel, for example, is now thought to have taken place in the late 9th century, rather than the early 7th century, BC. The implications of this revised chronology are substantial, not only for those interested in Phrygia and central Anatolia, but also for those interested in the Iron Age throughout the eastern Mediterranean. The new Gordion chronology has therefore generated a great deal of interest and excitement, as well as debate. This edited volume offers, for the first time, a comprehensive discussion of the new chronology, both from a methodological and an interpretive point of view. ""

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It might if those 200 years were for the start of the Iron Age, but they are not.

The archeological record is quite clear that the Nineteenth Dynasty was quite firmly in the Bronze Age as was at least the early part of the Twentieth.  There simply is not enough time that could have have elapsed if the exodus begins while Thutmose II was pharaoh for there to be significant quantities of iron chariots for Joshua to worry about.  Indeed, under your chronology, the Battle of Qadesh would have to have been oddly fought with outmoded bronze chariots more than a century after iron chariots were available in quantity in the promised land.

Your suggested timeline also has the Egyptians taking control of the promised land and thus also of Israel for a period of time during the era of the Judges.  Yet that is not at all mentioned in the Bible which is a strong indication that it did not happen when you propose and that if historical, the exodus happened during the Rameside period sometime after the Battle of Qadesh when Egypt had lost its control over the Levant.

[color1]

200 years earlier: If after complicated correlations with tree rings & pottery, etc the iron age (hittites in syria/levant) is moved earlier by 200 years, that would put iron chariots in northern canaan around 1500 - 1400 BC.  So imo all the dates are correlating around 1430ish BC/BCE/??? for the Joshua  Hebrew conquest of Canaan.

  More carbon-14 dating of thousands of seeds will confirm Hazor, Jericho, etc.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Do you bother to read the stuff you cherry pick?  The 200 year shift is not for the entire Iron Age, but for some specific events in Anatolia that even with the shift happened well after not only the exodus but also the era of David and Solomon.

[color1]

The point is after complicated correlations, the iron age was moved up by 200 years.  The implication is if fhe same complicated correlation is used for other previously dated, they also would be moved up.  Each chapter dealt with the recorrectiion of previous carbon dated layers.

It's not just about one specific place. It's about the correlation/correction method moved the date by 200 years from the previous carbon dating of soil layers.

If the same correctiions are made in other parts of the Caanan/Turkey/etc, the iron age moves up 200 years.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's obvious you don't read more that the bits you cherry pick in hopes they will support your theory, or if you do, you have poor reading comprehension.

The corrections are not being made because of a change in radiocarbon dating methods.  It's because radiocarbon dates are replacing others that were based upon written records of the neighbors of the Phyrgians.  Hence a layer of destruction at their capital Gordium that had been thought to be due to the Cimmerian invasion in the early 7th century BCE  is now believed to be due to an earlier undocumented disaster in the late 9th century BCE.  Outside of the dating of Anatolian artifacts found in situations where radiocarbon or dendrochronological dating cannot be done, this correction will have no significant effects on the dating of the Iron Age.

Besides, even if there were a large scale shift, it would push the dates of all the New Kingdom dynasties back earlier, which, given the uncertainties of the dates of the chaotic Third Intermediate Period that followed it, would not be unreasonable if there were evidence for it.  One simply does not find appreciable quantities of iron artifacts in Egypt until the late Twentieth Dynasty and we know the relative dates of the Eighteenth thru Twentieth Dynasties too well for those to be compressed.  The archaeological record simply does not support an early Eighteenth Dynasty exodus because if there were such an exodus then, the Israelites could not have encountered iron chariots in Cannon only half century later.

[color1]

''Reconstructed third name ring with the name “Ishrael” (van der Veen,
Theis and Görg 2010: 18).
  
In summary, the authors of the new study believe that the name on the Berlin statue base fragment is that of Israel and that it was part of a name list originally written in the
Eighteenth Dynasty. This is much earlier than the appearance of the name Israel on the Merenptah Stela. Furthermore, they conclude that their findings “indeed suggest that
Proto-Israelites had migrated to Canaan sometime during the middle of the
second millennium BCE” (van der Veen, Theis and Görg 2010: 21).""

""The Hittites were rivals of ancient Egypt. The were powerful from the 20th to 13th
century B.C. and controlled an area that roughly corresponds to modern Turkey and Syria. Around 2000 B.C. the Hittites were unified under a king named Labarna.
A later king pushed their domain into Mesopotamia and Syria.
The empire lasted into 1650 B.C. A more powerful kingdom rose in 1450 B.C.
This kingdom possessed iron.""
 
modified 31 May 2013:
""   Having considered and dispensed with each of Hoffmeier’s several objections to this reading, including the difference between “s” and “sh,” what may or may not be a lamed or resh and whether the sculptor was consistent in his spelling, they then address whether the name found could refer to Biblical Israel. Noting the references to Ashkelon and Canaan, and their geographic proximity, van der Veen et al. ask rhetorically “what other name in the same general region would be so strikingly reminiscent of that of biblical Israel?” (Id. at 19.) Their answer is that there is “no linguistically feasible name” in any other known texts, so “‘Israel’ remains the most logical candidate.” (Id.)

         But how old is the Berlin pedestal relief? van der Veen et al. tentatively ascribe a date for the slab to Ramesses II (around 1279-1212 BCE), a later date being deemed unlikely on linguistic grounds. (Id. at 20.)  At the same time, they acknowledge that such a date “is by no means certain.” (Id.) Perhaps even more intriguing, they suggest that based on certain “archaic elements,” the names on the pedestal could have been “copied from an earlier source that could have had its origin during the first half of the Eighteenth Dynasty or perhaps earlier still . . . .” (Id. at 17.)  Parenthetically, Sarna dates Ramesses (Rameses) II to 1290-1224 BCE. He puts the 18th Dynasty at 1552-1306 BCE. (See Sarna, above, at 8, 10.)

         van der Veen et al. recognize that many scholars will have difficulty believing that Biblical Israel arrived in Palestine prior to Merneptah, especially as far back as the mid-Eighteenth Dynasty.  (van der Veen, above, at 20.) Yet a migration “nearer the middle of the second millennium BCE” is what they say the evidence suggests. (Id. at 21.)

         There is, of course, a lively debate about whether one or more actual migrations from Egypt might have occurred, when it or they might have occurred and how many individuals participated.  What cannot be denied, however, is that the writing on the stone known as Berlin no. 21687 is more than a phrase. It is evidence. It may or may not be reliable evidence of the claimed military victories, but if van der Veen et al. are correct, it appears to be rock solid evidence of the existence of a people known as Israel and at a time earlier, possibly even 200 years earlier, than any other hard evidence had indicated.""

Egyptians called them Israel, Yshael and Caananites called them Apiru (Hebrews) around 1400 to 1300 BC.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Even if the reconstruction is correct, it would be consistent with the enslavement in Egypt of Israel by the new pharaoh to whom Joseph meant nothing. (Exodus 1:8)  It also would be consistent with the viewpoint that Exodus is a myth based upon some historical underpinnings, much as the Iliad is a myth based upon a real Trojan War.

The bit about the Hittites is more of your cherry picking.  That new kingdom lasted until near the beginning of the twelfth century, so its later history does indeed overlap the early Iron Age of Anatolia, but the author is not stating that they were in the Iron Age at the beginning of the Hittite New Kingdom c.1450 BCE.

[color1]

""The  CHM was also found at equal frequency in Jews of both European and North African ancestry, indicating that it was in place before the communities separated about 1000 BC.  It was also found, using other genetic markers to calculate the approximate time at which the common ancestor of the contemporary Kohenim lived, that the original owner of the Cohen Modal Haplotype lived about 106 generations ago, placing the original possessor of the haplotype at about 33-3400 years ago, the approximate time period in which Aaron would have lived.""

DNA for Pharaohs, DNA for Aaron all point to 1430 BC time frame for Exodus; Avaris homestyle for first Hebrew settlement homes provides proof for Exodus of Hebrews/Isrealites from Egypt to Caanan;

should soon have thousands of grain samples from destruction of Hazor & Jericho around 1300 to 1500 BC (will have to wait till results published). Will they show 1430 +- 40 years?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Genetic dating is not something that can be done to a precision of ± 10 years as you are trying to do. 

To quote from the Wikipedia article on this subject:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other words, CMH cannot be used for the purpose of trying to date a historical exodus.  It simply does not offer the necessary level of precision to do so.

[color1]

In regards the Cohens, they trace their lineage to Aaron (Levites) to the Exodus and to Moses.  The Bible also states this. The dna samples (larger sample set with each new dna study) of Cohens confirms that Aaron is indeed their male ancestor.

The Biblical account of plagues is confirmed in the mummies of the 3 Pharaohs !  This is amazing/supernatural.  The plague of boils/lesions affecting all Egyptians including the god Pharaohs is confirmed totally outside of the Bible.  The Passover plague of the death of the first born is also seen in the 3 Pharaohs -- Thutmose III the first born of Thutmose II is a secret substitution. (The real Thutmose III must have died - Passover plague).  This must have shaken the very fabric of Egyptian society and beliefs.  They had to keep secret that Moses' GOD could easily kill the Egyptian god Pharaoh at will.

The Hebrews came out of Egypt and built homes in the exact style as those from Avaris, Egypt in the Nile delta. The Nile delta is where the Bible says Joseph, the vicar of Egypt, settled Jacob and the 70 Israelites.  This is PROOF of the Exodus of Israelites/Hebrews into Caanan.

  The pottery dating of the destruction layers at Jericho & Hazor & others show a destruction around 1430ish BCE.  

The carbon-14 dating keeps getting revised/updated/disputed/re-sanctioned.  With the timeframe moving hundreds-of-years (hard to have confidence when all this is happening/happened in the last 50 years).  I as a lay person have to assume they know what they are doing.  But do they with carbon 14 dating?  Vesuvius erupts about every 700 years.  Assuming they know what they are doing: there are now THOUSANDS of wheat/grain samples from the destruction layer in question available & being carbon-14 tested from Hazor & Jericho.

Personally there is enough evidence for the conquest of Caanan/Joshua's conquest.

  There is direct evidence for the Biblical account of 2 plagues (boils,passover), exodus & conquest.  Theres is dna evidence for Aaron, the first priest during Exodus days, & therefore for Moses.

   the other plagues of Egypt (frogs, flies, darkness, gnats), the parting of the sea, the sojourn in the desert-- one can't realistically expect to find any evidence after 3000 years.

added 31 May 2013:
""At Tel Amarna, Egypt, cuneiform tablets from about the 14th c. BC were discovered, and they contain urgent pleas to the Egyptian Pharaoh Akenaten, asking him to do something about the "Apiru" which were invading in sizeable numbers and taking over parts of Canaan. --And again, as mentioned earlier, Dr. Frank Moore Cross of Harvard Universtiy states that the term "Apiru" is "the origin of the term 'Hebrews'." So, at about this time, there is a return and major influx of Hebrews back into Canaan --in large enough numbers to cause alarm in the current residents, and a plea to higher authorities in Egypt for help.

To confirm this "invasion" picture further, consider several lines from the Victory Stele of Pharaoh Merneptah, which was found in his funerary temple in Thebes. That granite monument has lines of heiroglyphics which commemorate the conquests of Merneptah in Canaan in about 1210 BC.""

From Apiru in Akhenaten's time (1350 BC) to Isreal by 1210 BC in Caanan.

Exodus happened 100+ years earlier than the Apiru (Hebrew) reference  under Thutmose II imo around 1480ish BC.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Repetition doesn't improve your argument.  Indeed, all you have managed to make me do is make we wonder if you are an atheist trolling by pretending to be a Christian who believes what you are saying.

[color1]

Joshua in the Bible doesn't mention iron chariots.  It does clearly state that Joshua defeated the Hittites in Caanan.  I think Judges in the Bible states, that Israel could not drive out the people due to iron chariots - but that could imply a hundred years or more (or not) after Joshua's conquest.

Judges 1:19 "The Lord was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had iron chariots."

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I would have thought you would have at least been more careful in quoting from the Bible.

Joshua 17:16-18 (NIV)
16 "The people of Joseph replied, “The hill country is not enough for us, and all the Canaanites who live in the plain have chariots fitted with iron, both those in Beth Shan and its settlements and those in the Valley of Jezreel.”

17 But Joshua said to the tribes of Joseph—to Ephraim and Manasseh—“You are numerous and very powerful. You will have not only one allotment 18 but the forested hill country as well. Clear it, and its farthest limits will be yours; though the Canaanites have chariots fitted with iron and though they are strong, you can drive them out.”


Beside the above and Judges 1:19, there are also mentions in Judges 4:3 and 4:13.

[color1]

Yep I missed the references in Joshua. So the Bible clearly says that iron chariotes exited during Joshua's time.

In Joshua 11 defeating Hittites and an army assembled numerous as the sand with chariots and horses (no mention of iron chariots for this vast army). Joshua also defeated a long list of kings.

By Joshua 13, it says when Joshua was very old , God told him to allot the land -- in those intervening years - iron chariots came into the possesion of some peoples.  History says the Hittites/relatives.  How many years was that?  So perhaps the Bible records a military technology revolution in the making in real time.  When Joshua first began the invasion of Caanan & defeated the Hittites, there are mentions of chariots (nothing special).

By the time is he is very old - peoples now have iron chariots ( a military technology revolution  ).

[color1]

Somebodyelse's analyses copied and I think is interesting:

""One possible clue as to whom the Exodus pharaoh may be comes from an inscription from Queen Hatshepsut. She mentions that she was rebuilding a temple in Avaris, from where we mentioned earlier the shepherd kings ruled.
      The inscription states: "I have raised up that which was gone to ruins,  . . . since the Asiatics were in the midst of Avaris of the Northland and vagabonds were in the midst of them, overthrowing that which had been made. He (their leader) ruled without Re and did not act by divine command down to the reign of my majesty . . . I have made distant those whom the gods hate and the earth has carried off their footprints."  
       First of all, the statement "He" (their leader) could possibly be a reference to none other then Moses himself. Note that she said “He did not follow Re” who was a false god of Egypt. From her statement it appears that Israel was in Egypt, down to or right before her reign. So this would indicate that either her father Thutmose I or her husband Thutmose II with whom she coreigned as queen, would be candidates for the Exodus Pharaoh.
      Another really interesting fact about this inscription is that 'James Breasted,' who compiled a book "Ancient Records of Egypt from the Eighteenth Dynasty,” made a note on this inscription concerning the Egyptian word translated as the “Asiatics.” It is either (sm-mw) or (s-mw).  In Egyptian hieroglyphics "sm" means (a pass of property) and “mw” means (water), which would refer to "the people whose property passed through the water,”  a possible reference to the parting of the Red sea and Israel departing through it with all their belongings. The alternative translation would be  "s" = (basin, body of water, sea) and "mw" = (water) which could refer to "the people of the basin water or we would say the river delta.” Which would describe the land of Goshen and the area in which Israel was said to have settled.    
      Which one of the two translations is correct is unsure, since the wall where the inscription is found was in very poor condition. Both of these Egyptian symbols look very similar. ("sm" is a rectangular box with a set of legs walking on the bottom of the box, whereas "s" is a rectangular box with what looks like a slanted roman numeral 2 just below the box).
      Another inscription from Thutmose III, who coreigned along with Hatshepsut, also indicates that the Israelites had left Egypt.  
       In a hymn he wrote to his god, Amon-Re, he states: "it devours those who are in the marshes . . .  cut down are the heads of the Asiatics (<> mw), there is not a remnant of them."  
       So it appears that either at his time, or just before, there was no Israelite remaining in the marsh areas of the Nile Delta. ""
 
Once again imo, Thutmose II is the Pharaoh of the Exodus.  By Thutmose III asiatics had left  Goshen/Nile Delta area (Israelites and other peoples left during the Exodus the Bible says).

 
June 4, 2013:  another quote from someonelse:

""Gardiner writes concerning the death of Thutmose II,: "Despite the terse way in which the fact is recorded, there is no reason to think that Tuthmosis died other than a normal death." If he were the Pharaoh who ruined Egypt however, there would be every reason for a terse report of his death! Gardiner continues his narrative, "An almost undecorated tomb is confidently ascribed to [Thutmose II], and from its neglect one might conjecture that no one cared very much what was his fate; his funerary temple, is a paltry affair." the lack of decoration could indicate a sudden death and it is clear that his life and death were not recorded for posterity with any great reverence or enthusiasm.
...
Mertz 9 follows Breasted 7 in giving an interesting translation concerning the death of Thutmose II, "He went forth to heaven, having mingled with the gods." This seems the wrong way round for the usual report of a pharaoh's death he would normally have been reported as ascending to heaven before mingling with the gods, but this report could be literally true from the Egyptians point of view, as God said to Moses, "See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh." (7: 1)""

  Thutmose II did NOT receive the usual pomp and decorum associated with a Pharoah's death and entombment.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anyone who knows anything about Ancient Egypt knows that one of the things the Eighteenth Dynasty prided itself on was having driven out the Hyskos, who were a largely Semitic group of peoples, and who had reigned from Avaris as the Fifteenth Dynasty.  Not surprisingly, those Semites worshiped their own gods, rather than the Egyptian gods, tho in the manner of most ancient religions, they did become syncretized with the chief Hyskos god being associated with Set, the Egyptian god of the desert, storms, and foreigners and they worshiped Set instead of Re as the chief god.

As for the lack of pomp associated with the burial of Thutmose II, that is easily explained.  The tomb that had originally thought to be his (KV42) is now known to have never been used for him.