Archaeologica.org

i have recently read an excellant paper on the exodus which has compelled me to start to do more research on the archaeological and historical evidences for the sojourn and exit of the israelites.

i am strictly dealing with what evidence we do have and would appreciate it if all declatory statements and biased opinions be left at the door so we can investigate this properly. if you do not have credible links or credible statements, please refrain from posting here. if you can't back up your position, then hold off till you can, please.

in the time i have remianing, i will be posting quotes from the paper entitiled 'An Alternative View of the Archaeology of the Exodus' by Alan Montgomery along with what research i can find. this discussion will review the Ipuwer Papyrus and other texts tthat seem to be out of date given the traditional dating of the exodus plus take into account Velikovsky's thesis among other comments from those who may or may not agree with him

this is a serious investigation with no agenda and i am even prepared to change my position and agree with minimalist that Bryant Wood may have a religious agenda attached to his work. {of course i won't change my belief about the sojourn or exodus but i am willing to change many of the details of what i think plus even eat some crow concerning some of my comments if the new investigation warrants it. please do not rub it in as we all say things and may have to change our positions when new information is published}

so let's leave the crap at the door on this one as i do not want to cause Frank any extra work so please police yourselves and i will do the same. this is most likely the last topic i will start and i would like to go out with a good one.

Go ahead....he's one of these guys who believes he can change the dates of Egyptian history (which Dever warned about in Jacobovici's fantasy).

By the way, I was looking around for his credentials. Other than a reference to an Honorary Bachelor of Science, I can't seem to find anything about him.

i will get on it this afternoon or this evening as i want to do some checking of some details first. i hope to ignore jacobovici for the most part as he has been discredited in a previous thread and i think he is off the wall.

LOL.


For once we agree.

Arch
I can find masses of evidence against there ever being an exodus , far to many to quote .But I like to research both sides of the story and the following are the only factual (if true) evidence I have been able to find.

In the Brooklyn Museum (p.276, fig. 310) resides a papyrus scroll numbered Brooklyn 35:1446 which was acquired in the late 19th century by Charles Wilbour. This dates to the reign of Sobekhotep III, the predecessor of Neferhotep I and so the pharaoh who reigned one generation before Moses. This papyrus is a decree by the pharaoh for a transfer of slaves. Of the 95 names of slaves mentioned in the letter, 50% are Semitic in origin. What is more, it lists the names of these slaves in the original Semitic language and then adds the Egyptian name each had been assigned.

‘The people who lived in Avaris were not Egyptian but Asiatic Palestinian or Syrian. The finds there included numerous pottery fragments of Palestinian origin. There are large numbers of long-haired Asiatic sheep buried which indicate these people to be shepherds

Not very compelling evidence im afraid but all that I can find that exists , and doesnt really stand up in comparison to the reams of material for no exodus .

for fucks sake Min
in the original version of the Bible the Heebs claimed that their ancestors built heliopolis (on) while they were there
it got cut from later versions because it was obviously bollox
its like any good story
it gets changed dependant on the culture that is listening to make it more believable and enduring
like steamboat willie becoming mickey mouse
only the steamboat willie fundies still worship ole Walt
know what I mean

Archae.

I don't believe the Exodus happened, but saying for a moment that it did, the first thing that comes to mind is the traditional idea that it happened in the time of Ramses II can't be correct. If the Isrealites passed the cities of Ramses and Pithom they would have had to leave roughly around 1240 BCE. The problem with that is that the city of Jericho which they were supposed to have sacked some years later had already been abandoned for quite some time.

According to Kathleen Kenyon: http://www.varchive.org/ce/jericho.htm

As concerns the date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites, all that can be said is that the latest Bronze Age occupation should, in my view, be dated to the third quarter of the fourteenth century B.C. This is a date which suits neither the school of scholars which would date the entry of the Israelites into Palestine to c. 1400 B.C. nor the school which prefers a date of c. 1260 B.C.” (14)

Let's allow Arch to post his theory...or at least Montgomery's theory. As noted, he wants to redefine Egyptian history so that the bible fits....just like Rohl and Jacobovici tried to do unsuccessfully. The difference is that Rohl went down and Jacobovici went up.

I always need to see the evidence. At one time I believed in the possibility of Atlantis, but we had a discussion on hoaxes and misconceptions about archaeology last year and I came away thinking it was important for me to apply the same standard of proof to my own little pet theories that I gladly apply to everything else.

It didn't feel good to have one of my favourite stories shot down, but truth is better than self delusion.

Having said that, if there was conclusive proof for the exodus that is produced by unbiased professionals using scientific method, peer-reviewed and published, I'd happy to look at it. If it's compelling I would be willing to change my view on the subject. So I too am interested in what Archae does produce.

so you believed in Atlantis
how about the works of Sitchin and Childress and Hancock or even Daniken
you still believe any of them or did you apply common sense to those as well
just asking
not looking for a fight or nothing

Hey Marduk, go over to Childress's bookstore website, and go to the bottom of the book display, and see who's there.

why bother
Childress is an even bigger fraud than Hancock or Sitchin
and his stuff is so easily dismissable its funny
like radioactive skeletons at harappa 30 years before the instrument designed to measure radioactivity was invented
and hidden cave systems in the Americas that don't actually exist (i think he actually copied that from Daniken)
personally its like this Jim so don't take offence
if Daniken isn't promoting it then it doesnt exist
see Daniken is my own personal Pseudo god
Respect

Peace out.

marduk wrote:so you believed in Atlantis
how about the works of Sitchin and Childress and Hancock or even Daniken
you still believe any of them or did you apply common sense to those as well
just asking
not looking for a fight or nothing

No it's fine!

The first exposure I had to Hancock was hearing him referred to as a Kook (as in Han-kook) and the bits that were mentioned were enough to put me off so I have never read any of his stuff as far as I recall.

Sitchin and Childress I don't know about.

Von Daniken Yeah - I bought the whole thing back in high school. Banged that drum for a long time and denounced orthdox historians as blind and prejudiced idiots. You're allowed to be stupid when you're young, right? Now it just gets me mad at the 21st century egocentric bias of the whole thing - that ancient man couldn't possibly be that smart, that organized, that persistant, and have that kind of vision.

Then there was Mu, Lemuria, Ys, the Bimini road etc. I've bought some really shoddy stuff in my time. Good thing it's never too late to learn to think critically and to apply it to your most fondly held beliefs.

archaeologist, I am looking forward to reading the paper you are going to post.