So some of my diaries seem poised to become traditions. This comes from last year almost without change. Hell, it has been thousands of years since this story was first told, so it is not surprising I have little reason to change it from year to year.

Passover celebrates Moses leading "his people" out of Egypt, the reception of "THE LAW" and the entry into the "promised land."

So just who was this "Moses?" What kind of name is "Moses?" And just who are his "people?" Well, it seems that "Moses" may be a pseudonym or, really, just half a name, the rest having been suppressed. Yes, suppressed because of some dark secret! His people seem to have been a rag-tag bunch of dispossesed ne'er do wells who may have heard about the idea of "one god to rule them all" from a heretic Egyptian king whose memory was being suppressed at the time that someone like Moses might have existed. And the Exodus? It may not have been so voluntary. Maybe they were trouble makers kicked out for subversive beliefs! So just what is this Passover thing anyway?

Passover celebrates, supposedly, the escape of the Jews from slavery in Egypt. This escape is considered one of the defining moments in Judaism, perhaps THE most important defining moment. Into this event is placed the entirety of the ancient Jewish identity, supposedly divided into "12 tribes," as well as the defining of Jewish religious law. The problem is that the bible account is internally inconsistent and is clearly a mixture of several traditions and myths. That does not mean that there aren’t kernels of truth in it, but it is not clear how many events are covered by the Exodus story and what times those various events took place, or if any of the characters involved were real people. The bible cannot be taken literally because it is often internally contradictory. That is odd if it is the revealed word of God…but it is very understandable if it is the collected lore of a small group of semi-nomadic people who eventually established a small state or collection of tiny states and were desperately trying to define their identity in relation to their often stronger neighbors.

Most of the bible was never written down anywhere close to the events that are described. Much of the Torah (the first five books of the bible) did not form a coherent text until much later, probably the reigns of Hezikiah or Josiah. So the bible has about as much historical merit as, say, the Iliad or the story of Jason and the Argonauts. It cannot be ignored because historical people, places and events are there in the background, but it must be taken with Lot’s wife’s weight in salt.

First of all, the bible account of Exodus is now thought to conflate two separate stories: one about an escape from Egypt (or, as I will mention later, maybe from Egyptians rather than the state of Egypt), and one about an expulsion from Egyptian territory.

What follows looks at the scant contemporary written evidence and the far more abundant archaeological evidence with mere dashes of biblical reference. I have read about a dozen books on the subject, but I find that the two most convincing and most up to date (though also somewhat controversial) are Jonathan N. Tubb’s book Canaanites (1998) and Israel Finkelstein’s book The Bible Unearthed. Both use primarily archaeology and only occasionally try to fit biblical stories to the archaeological facts. Most other books start from the bible and try to smoosh in archaeology to make sense of the biblical chronology.

In the bible, the Hebrews are a coherent group of about 12 tribes (really the number and names vary) who often look to a single leader and who migrated from Babylon to Canaan to Egypt then back to Canaan. Archaeologically, the Hebrews were a group that evolved in situ from the native Canaanite population. In fact, there is no difference between the population that existed in the hill country that became ancient Israel and Judah and the surrounding Canaanites except that at one point the future Hebrews stopped eating pork. That is the earliest archaeological indication of uniqueness of the later Israelis: the disappearance of pork bones. They remained polytheistic worshipping Canaanite gods, including the very Canaanite El and Yaweh, the two gods that later Hebrews conflated into God. Monotheism does not seem a Hebrew characteristic until much later…really around the time of Josiah or even the Babylonian exile.

There may well have been groups who came from Babylon or Egypt who mixed with the Canaanite natives to form the Hebrew culture. But there is no real evidence for this. In fact, if I may inject some genetic data, Y-chromosomal studies indicate that modern Jews, including Sephardim, Ashkinazim and Sabra and to a lesser degree even Ethiopian Jews and the South African Lemba, are a very genetically homogenous group (in comparison with most populations) that originated in the area of Israel and Palestine. Modern Jews and modern Palestinians show remarkable genetic relatedness, indicating both populations derive from the same ancient stock in the Levant. In other words, both Palestinians and Jews are descendents of the probably indigenous Canaanites, though both have mixed somewhat with other populations—Bablyonian, Greek, Egyptian, Arab, European, Bantu…

So from here on out I will refer to the region of Israel/Palestine by something approaching its original name: Canaan. Canaan is a small, largely unremarkable area that historically was caught between great empires to the North, South, East and West. Generally, when great empires clashed, they clashed right smack in the middle of Canaan. Our word "Armageddon" comes from the name of an unfortunate ancient city, Megiddo, which had the great luck of being the site of several of the great ancient battles. Megiddo paid a high price for its being honored by our modern vocabulary. The bible spends a lot of time linking the story of the Jews to both Babylon and Egypt. Well, Babylon (as well as Assyria, Persia…) was one great empire (to the East/North) and Egypt was the other great empire (to the South) that most often fought over Canaan. These were also the two main superpowers for trade and cultural influence. They were the USA and USSR of ancient times and Canaan was the Third World that the two fought over.

So let’s turn to what was going on around the time the Exodus was supposed to have occurred. Some time before the Exodus, during Egypt’s Middle Kingdom in the Middle Bronze Age, Egypt saw a large influx of Canaanites into it’s Northern area (the Delta). Entire settlements are Canaanite in character. At some point either this foreign element destabilized Egypt or took advantage of instability due to other causes and the Egyptian Delta was taken over by a group of people known as the Hyksos. The meaning of Hyksos is debated, but may mean "foreign kings." Archaeologically, the Hyksos are clearly Canaanites with a hint of other non-Semitic influences (possibly a group called the "Hurrians" who themselves were a mixture of two cultures). But in essence, the Hyskos rule over Egypt was a Canaanite dynasty and Canaan and Egypt became far more closely linked than ever before. Some think that this might be the time that Joseph entered Egypt, if there ever was such a single event. At some point, though, the southern, native Egyptians expelled the Hyksos and reestablished not only native control over Egypt, but Egyptian control over Canaan. One possible theory, though not well accepted, is that the expulsion story in Exodus may just possibly be an echo of the expulsion of the Canaanite Hyksos rulers out of Egypt. I tend to see this as unlikely. However, Canaanite domination of the Superpower Egypt would certainly have made a lasting impression on all Canaanites, including the people who became the Hebrews, and could easily have influenced later myths. If Haiti took over the United States for awhile and then was expelled, you can be sure that Hatians would remember that period of dominance for centuries to come! So a Hyksos/Hebrew link, though highly tenuous, may have some validity.

After the expulsion of the Hyksos, Egypt reached the pinnacle of its power under the 18th and 19th dynasties and even into the more troubled 20th dynasty. These three dynasties are the most important for Jewish identity because it is in this period that entities that were Hebrew and/or Israeli began to take form. In fact, the very first reference to both Israel and to groups related to the Philistines (ancient Palestinians?) come in a single 19th dynasty Egyptian text that mentions the destruction of both. In this text, both Israel and the "Sea People" (among whom the Philistines were later included; the name "Sea People" could mean either people from across the sea or people from the coast) are groups of people, not nations, and are clearly bit players, simply ruffians to be beaten up by the Egyptian military power or, in the case of some "Sea People" (specifically the Sherden) they were also mercenaries in the Egyptian Army. Specific reference to he Philistine branch of the "Sea People" came about 75 years later.

These very first references to Philistines and Israelis clearly comes after any Exodus. Turning back to the 18th dynasty, this is the Egypt most people know something about because it included Akhenaten and Tutankhamen. Akhenaten is interesting because he is the first person in recorded history to be monotheistic. He tried to reform all Egyptian religion to focus on a single god. If the theory that Jews had already entered Egypt by this point is true, and if they had not yet left, then they would have experienced the tumultuous time of Akhenaten’s religious reforms. Many people think that Akhenaten may have been the inspiration for Jewish monotheism. I have problems with this. Akhenaten’s religion was not a widespread religion. It was rather HIS religion with HIMSELF as the ONLY link between the one god and humans. It was not very much like later Jewish monotheism, though there are definitely some common themes. Furthermore, there is no evidence at all for Jewish monotheism for centuries afterwards. And yet, some see close parallels between some of Akhenaten’s writings and later biblical passages. Could some small group of Canaanites have taken to Akhenaten’s religion and preserved a memory of his writings that later got incorporated into the bible? Maybe…but as with the Hyksos/Hebrew connection, this is very tenuous.

Akhenaten, busy with religious turmoil, neglected his empire in Canaan. This period is extremely well documented because we have extensive archives of diplomatic correspondence from this time. Canaan was a mess with small cities fighting it out and with groups of semi-tribal/semi-bandit groups roaming the countryside and occasionally even taking over cities. These semi-tribal group were of mixed origins, but the term used for them, Hapiru, is thought by some to be the earliest form of the word "Hebrew." The Hapiru/Hebrew link was once thought to be exact. More recently, it has been largely rejected. However, it is hard to ignore. The word is similar, it refers to a group that seems kind of like the bands of roving Hebrews under Joshua, and they occur before and at the time of the Egyptian reference to a people (not a nation) called "Israel". The current theory can be summed up as: Not all Hapiru were Hebrews, but all Hebrews were Hapiru. The group of Canaanites (perhaps fresh from Egypt?) that became Hebrews and Israel, may have just been one particularly successful band of Hapiru and that rather derogatory name may have stuck...or even been proudly adopted the way many Australians are proud of convict ancestry.

After Akhenaten, a series of warrior Pharaohs ruled Egypt, and retook Canaan. Various groups of Hapiru were subdued, others served as mercenaries under Egyptian rule, and some served as laborers. It is quite possible that the group that became Hebrews were a group of Hapiru that served as mercenaries and/or laborers under the Pharaohs Seti I, Ramesses II and Merneptah. This was a period of Egyptian domination, but there were Canaanite rebellions as well. Did one group of Hapiru, possibly including some people influenced by Akhenaten’s religious reforms (now being suppressed by the reestablished Egyptian priestly authorities) and serving as mercenaries and laborers in Egypt, suddenly make a bid for freedom and escape into the wilderness east of Canaan? This is a perfectly plausible scenario that fits reasonably both the archaeology and the bible…but it is just a story and is supported by little more than circumstantial evidence. But…that text I mention that is the first reference to Israel and to Philistines was written during the reign of Merneptah. Based on place names and general events, many place the biblical Exodus story as referring to the reigns either of Seti I and Ramesses II, or to Ramesses II and Merneptah.

One thing that strikes me is that around this time Egypt controlled most of Canaan (sometimes in competition with the Hittites, another empire I love to read about and I have visited the ruins of their capital city). So one of my pet theories is that the Exodus is not about Jews leaving Egypt. It is about Jews throwing off Egyptian imperial control at one of the periods of declining Egyptian rule. That would place the Exodus story at a later date than I suggest above and would turn the story on its head somewhat. But Canaanites did gain independence from Egypt at a slightly later date and certainly the Jews would have been one of the communities that would have gained and celebrated freedom from Egyptian control. It all could have happened right in Canaan rather than in Egypt. But that is just one of my pet theories. I am not aware of any archaeologists or biblical scholars who see it that way.

To me all of these coincidences add up to something almost convincing. Hapiru serving Egypt, working on the very cities mentioned in Exodus as the places of Jewish slavery, followed by an incident where Egyptian soldiers defeated a loosely associated group of people called "Israel." It fits the Exodus story of Joseph bringing Jews in to Egypt in some official capacity (a captain of a mercenary group or labor contingent???) followed by Moses’ leading out a group escaping or being expelled followed by wandering for many years on the fringes of society (i.e. Hapiru) fighting with local authorities and city states (Joshua and Judges). One more odd coincidence is that "Moses" is in no way a Canaanite name. It is, in essence, half of an Egyptian name. It is usually used in conjunction with a god’s name as in the case of the Pharaohs named Thothmose (referring to the god Thoth). Later monotheistic Jews would NOT want one of their leaders to be named after an Egyptian god, so it seems like the god’s name was dropped leaving only "Moses." Moses was someone with an Egyptian name! In fact his name probably referred to some Egyptian god. An assimilated Canaanite who rebelled, perhaps?

So we see Canaanites entering Egypt and even ruling before the 18th dynasty expelled them (or more likely expelled only the Canaanite elite). We have a period of Canaanites being split between urban, pro-Egypt but squabbling and sometimes rebellious city-states (the hated Canaanites of the bible would fit well into this description), and non-urban troublemakers called Hapiru, a name similar to Hebrew. During the 19th dynasty we even have an out right reference to Israel. Then, during the 20th dynasty, there was a decline of Egyptian control and events that were either invasions and/or native uprisings and/or uprisings by former mercenaries that brought down some Empires (Hittite and Mycenaean) and weakened others (Egypt). The Iliad may date to these events since the same wave of unrest and instability engulfed the Greek world and was a time when Troy itself was destroyed. In this unrest (around 1190-1140 BC range) the Philistine city states developed. It is at this time that the bible places the rise of a unified Kingdom of Israel that then split into the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah. The biblical story of the rise of Israel is not well supported at this point. It is only during the period of the divided kingdom that we get references to kings like Omri, Ahab, Jehoram and others. So there is about a 200-year gap in the written references from the first mention of "Israel" during Merneptah’s reign to Moabite mentions of king Omri (of Israel, then only one of two Jewish kingdoms). And archaeology does not support any great united Kingdom of David and Solomon. However, there is little question that the Hebrews/Israelis did indeed exist at this time, eschewing pork but not otherwise different from other Canaanites, who emerged in the Hill Country (a backwater) of Canaan and eventually, in the times of Omri and Ahab, became a major local force. Judah, though it is more important in the bible, was the minor partner with only Israel ever fielding a large army and conquering neighboring lands. In fact the second reference to Israel is a Moabite reference to king Omri of Israel kicking Moabite ass! After that, though, most references are Assyrian and Egyptian references of tribute from Israel and Judah, or conquest of various cities in Israel and Judah. Of course eventually Assyria destroyed Israel and Babylon destroyed Judah, though there always was a population that remained in Canaan, eventually forming the Jewish people that exist today.

So there it is. The echoes of the Passover myth that exist in historical and archaeological evidence are few. But they are there. To me the name "Moses" is so un Jewish that it must reflect a real Egyptian name that got modified later and so reflects a real person. The Pharaohs are real and the cities the Jews were supposed to have labored on were real and did involve Hapiru labor. And soon after, Merneptah defeated a tiny group of people called "Israel." Somewhere in that thin evidence is a real Passover story. But we may never know what it is.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

| | | | | | | |