The Biblical Archaeology Society Forum

Regarding this Moses and The Exodus

If you have not read the below posts, may I humbly suggest you do as doing so will allow you to better see the straight line that archaeology can now produce in the era of the Patriarchs.  Something no generally accepted chronology does.

Pagan influences in Christian Chronology (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=433.0 ) Pagan Influences in Christian Chronology

Abraham found here. (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=464.0 ) Abraham

Joseph/Imhotep belongs in 3rd Dynasty (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=438.0 ) Joseph/Imhotep

I maintain that archaeology of the last 30 years has uncovered new information that allows even a grandmother such as me to realign Biblical History into a coherent line.  That flows with the history of neighboring states, as history should.  The major topic of this post will be Moses and the time that archaeology best places him.

The Bible tells us that the house of Israel lives and prospers in Egypt for years after the death of Joseph (Exodus 1:7).  Until a new Pharaoh comes along that did not know Joseph (Exodus 1: Eight).  This would be Pharaoh Unas, he succeeded (ca. 2371 BCE) the old line that descended from the 4th dynasty Pharaohs whose founder claimed to have known Imhotep.

In ca. 2334-2265 Sargon the Great establishes the first Semitic Empire in Mesopotamia, according to the story.  His mother abandons him in a reed basket, in the river and is saved by the will of the Gods.  (Stiebing 2003: 65-71).

In ca. 2282 Pharaoh Teti the first Pharaoh of the 6th dynasty succeeds Pharaoh Unas.  This is during the increasing power, of a Semitic Empire in Mesopotamia.  We find two Pharaohs with poor claims to the throne of Egypt.  If, the House of Israel is present in Egypt at this time we can understand these Pharaohs having fear of the Semitic house of Israel (Exodus 1:9-10).  We find as well; his own guards (Kanawati 2003: 183-184) may, have assassinated Pharaoh Teti.  Enslaving an entrenched and well known and by this time an important Semitic people could lead to a disruption in society leading to this assassination.  The Bible recounts that the Pharaoh that first enslaved the House of Israel also was interested in childbirth (Exodus 1:15-22).  Archaeology now shows us that Pharaoh Teti and his eldest son Pepy I become unlike other Pharaohs great supporters of Hathor in her role of fertility (Lesko 1999: 93).

I see already a good comparison between Exodus and archaeology it encourages me to continue.

Teti and Pepy I both build their Ka Temples in the ancient city of Bast, which is about 5 km from Pi-Ramesses and Pithom (Exodus 1:11; Baines and Malek 1990: 175). 
During the reign of Pharaoh Teti, a young Egyptian of noble blood starts his rise in the Egyptian court as his father did before him.  His name is Weny or Weni he leads so he boasts on his funerary stela that he lead five campaigns into the Southern Levant enslaving the people there.  Then all alone, sat in judgment of Pepy’s I anointed Queen and then forced the enslaved folks to great tasks that some archaeologist proclaim as impossible!  Below are sites you can visit to determine for yourself.  (Please remember this Lord was claiming things he did while alive, and would therefore be judged by them in the all-important afterlife by his gods, primarily those Pharaohs he had served in life.  I do not believe this ancient lord made any of it up.)

The autobiography of Weni (http://ib205.tripod.com/weni.html)
Weni the Elder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weni_the_Elder)
THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF WENI (http://www1.hollins.edu/faculty/saloweyca/CLAS260/weni.html)

Regarding Lord Weni’s judgment of the early Queen of Pepy I, it is interesting that the son of an assassinated Pharaoh would hold a private trial against an anointed Queen.  What reasons could have caused this?  Pepy I at this time would not be an old man incapable of ruling.  He surely was continuing in the ways of his father, who seeing Sargon the Great Empire growing would also have wanted good control over the Semitics in his borders and beyond.  One real possibility is that the anointed queen had adopted an outlawed infant son, making him in reality a true heir of Pepy I?  Bringing in a condemned child as son of Pharaoh’s daughter would have been sufficiently disgusting to the reigning Pharaoh Pepy I to have ordered a secret trial.  His own wife betrayed his order!  For those not well educated in Egyptian law, adoption was an important way of making ones name live after death without having a child.  It was a legal way to have a legal heir.

In due time, the Pharaoh that had tried to kill him died (Exodus 2:23) Pepy I had a long reign 40-50 years long.  Towards the end of it Pepy I finally had an heir, his name was Menkaurf, his mother was Queen Ankhenesmerire I the daughter of Nebet and Khui of Abydene and full sister to Queen Ankhenesmerire II, another Queen of Pepy I (mother of Pepy II) and Lord Djau.  Aside from expeditions into the southern Levant, expeditions were also into Nubia during this dynasty (Grimal 1992: 80-88).  Lord Weni lived well into Pharaoh Menkaurf’s brief reign.  His brief reign resulted in his half-brother/cousin Pepy II becoming Pharaoh as a very small child, he like Menkaurf had his Uncle Lord Djau and mother rule as co-regents until he came to age.  It is at the death of his uncle Djau that we can according to Biblical scripture place the time of Moses’ return to Egypt (Exodus 4:19).

According to Revised Edition Handbook of Biblical Chronology by Jack Finegan, 1998, Hendrickson Publishers; Table 107 pg. 206 gives us a rough dating of 232 years between Abraham and Joseph in Egypt.  This is nearly equal to the time from Queen Regent Merneith and Pharaoh Den to Pharaoh Khasekhemwy.  Scripture tells us that Moses leads the House of Israel out of Egypt 430 years after they entered (Exodus 12: 40) this is nearly equal to the end of the 6th dynasty and the rule of Pepy II. 

More events that coincide with Biblical scripture.  Redford 1992: 57.   Pepy II’s general dies at the hands of Asiatics at the shore of the Red Sea.  Exodus 14: 21-30.

Redford 1992: 63. Southern Levant shows marked change in society from semi-industrial to rustic pastoralism, stockbreeding dominating agriculture.

Grimal 1992: 138-139.  Egypt is depopulated, tombs robbed, poverty, and ruin sets upon the nation.  Notations of the Admonitions of Ipuwer   Exodus 12: 33-36.
See also Strudwick 2005: 227-229.

Mazar 1990:141. Jericho and more cities of  Canaan are destroyed at the end of the Early Bronze Age.




Bibliography

Baines, John and Jaromir Malek.  (1990). The Cultural Atlas of the World Ancient Egypt.   Stonehenge.
Grimal, Nicolas.  (1992).   A History of Ancient Egypt.  (English edition).  (Ian Shaw, trans.)  Blackwell.
Kanawati, Naguib.  (2003).   Conspiracies in the Egyptian Palace: Unis to Pepy I. Routledge.
Lesko, Barbara L.  (1999).   The Great Goddesses of Egypt. Oklahoma.
Mazar, Amihai.  (1992).  Archaeology of the Land of the Bible • 10,000—586 B.C.E. (first paperback edition).  Doubleday.
Redford, Donald B.  (1992).  Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times. Princeton.
Stiebing, Jr. William H. (2003).  Ancient Near Eastern History and Culture. Longman.
Strudwick, Nigel C.  (2005)  (Leprohon, R. J, Ed.). Texts from the Pyramid Age.
Society of Biblical Literature Atlanta.

An original piece based upon Pjbl2223@aol.com copyrighted 2000-2008 The Archaeological Chronology of Biblical Lands.  All rights reserved.

I would agree that the EB III provides a wonderful background for the Bible's stories. I am soon to publish a book detailing the matter. You forgot to mention the Great Famine that took place during this period.

However, this is just the foundation for a text that was added to over time. There are Iron age references in the text. Hittites lived with Abraham, which seems unlikely in the Early Bronze Age. Egypt didn't have chariots either, such as mentioned in the story of Joseph.

Hence, we see a layering of text over the ages.  There were specific techniques used to add text to ancient literature. These techniques  are discussed by Tigay in his work on Gilgamesh. By knowing these techniques and working backwards, one can deconstruct the text to get an Early Bronze Age document.

The very term "Israel" would not have existed in the Early Bronze Age either.

Hello Michael thank you, sir for the post.  You are right there was a great famine in Egypt at the end of the Old Kingdom and I did forget to mention it.
 
I am sorry sir; I have to disagree with your assessment on the chariot.  Our fellow poster Turanclancath and I have been discussing this matter in the thread Deborah and the Iron Chariots.  Please see link below, post number 5 addresses your concern.  Hopefully adequately enough.
 
deborah and the iron war chariots (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=476.msg4295#new)
 
Regarding the Hittites, again archaeology does provide evidence of the Hittites in the 5th millennium only known as the "Kurgan" at that time.  Please see page 26,  Macqueen, J.G.  (1999). The Hittites and their Contemporaries in Asia Minor, Revised and Enlarged Edition.  ( 2nd paperback printing).  Thames and Hudson.  They were migrating from the Black Sea southward in the 4th millennium.  Using scripture and more modern archaeological advances from the last 30-20 years I believe the best placement for Abraham is during the early 3rd millennium.  Making it extremely possible that one or two Hittites/Kurgan/Indo-European speakers were present in the Levant during the early 3rd millennium as well.

May I ask why you believe that Israel the term could not have existed in the Early Bronze Age?

I like your term layering of texts, thank you.  My very best wishes sir, on the publication of your book.

Have a nice day Michael, to yours as to all.

I didn't see any archaelogical evidence that Egypt had chariots in the Early Bronze Age in that post.

In my work I had to also replace the word "Philistine" with "Phoenecian" as a correct translation in several places where it was used, especially in the story of Samson, a story based on the god Shamash.

The midrash claims the first pharaoh of Moses lived for 94 years, from age 6 to 100. This is the same as Pepi II who ruled during the Great Famine, when the Nile "turned to blood." There is also an Egyptian myth involving the goddess Hathor and Osiris in turning the Nile red.

I believe the first known use of the word "Israel"is from a stele which dates to about 1250 BCE or so. I sincerely doubt if the term was used earlier.  In the EB period the Canaanites were simply tribes. The Amorites were the main group. I suggest it is from the Amorites that the early stories evolved from borrowed Akkadian texts.

I believe Sayce is correct when he claims "Moses" is a from an Assyrian word "Masu" meaing "hero" and was use to descibe Marduk.  Most of the patriarchs are taken from Babylonian gods, similar to how the Catholic Church would take local dieties and make them into saints.  The Amorites would take gods and make them into patriarchs. Adam, Eve, Abraham, Moses, and Samson are examples.

Thinking, thinking I will return to reply more fully.  I do appreciate your answer, hence my decision in pausing to answer it, at this time.

Other than to say:

The study of culture, anthopology explains very well, the absence of chariots and horses in the Old Kingdom sir.  If allowed to.

Myself, like Dr. John D. Currid sees greater relation between Egyptian and the Old Testament than Mesopotamian sources, sir. 

Currid, John D.  (Foreword by Kenneth A. Kitchen).  (1997).  Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament.  Baker Books.

Again thank you so very much for your answer, time, and consideration.  They will be returned sir.
As always my best to you and yours, as to all.

I would agree that the EB III provides a wonderful background for the Bible's stories. I am soon to publish a book detailing the matter. You forgot to mention the Great Famine that took place during this period.

However, this is just the foundation for a text that was added to over time. There are Iron age references in the text. Hittites lived with Abraham, which seems unlikely in the Early Bronze Age. Egypt didn't have chariots either, such as mentioned in the story of Joseph.

Hence, we see a layering of text over the ages.  There were specific techniques used to add text to ancient literature. These techniques  are discussed by Tigay in his work on Gilgamesh. By knowing these techniques and working backwards, one can deconstruct the text to get an Early Bronze Age document.

The very term "Israel" would not have existed in the Early Bronze Age either.

Dear Michael, first let me say thank you for waiting on me while I gave proper attention to your post.  It is greatly appreciated, sir.

I try very hard not to tamper with scripture again, I am cautious in nature.  Saying that, I would not have pictures of horses or chariots in my Old Kingdom tomb.  During the Old Kingdom one’s afterlife was dependent on ‘your’ Pharaoh to provide you with the hoped for afterlife.  Since, documentation is rather substantial that it was only at the end of the fifth dynasty sir, that Pharaoh decorated his tomb walls at all.  Then it is with the Pyramid Texts not pictures of life hoped for in the afterlife.  Understanding this and that archaeology now can place with reasoned, and scholarly support for horses, and carts into the 3rd millennium I do not share your opinion, I am very sorry sir.  To turn up one’s nose at a form of transportation that saved time as did horses and carts is not within the traditional fashion of Egyptians.  Considered supportive of desired innovations, when everyone was using horses with a degree of skill that indicates long exposure of ‘the new thing’.  Again if allowed anthropology, culture can explain this. 

Donkeys we know today sir, certainly were domesticated within the 4th millennium (a. Akkerman and Schwartz 2005: 2006; b. McEvedy 2002: 26).  Regarding the archaeological remains: in Egypt, there exists the problem of the water table underneath it tends to destroy much the remains, and history especially the further back in time the study is.

The Midrash sir, dates according to my understanding to after Christ, after Manetho for that matter if my understanding is correct.

Midrash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash)

Midrash - AOL Search Reference Center  (http://plus.aol.com/aol/reference/Midrash/Midrash?flv=1)

Therefore, in my most humble opinion the Midrash is suspect regarding scripture, which predates Manetho.  Even the most severe critic of Biblical scripture predates it, to Manetho.  This lends in my view more support for scripture than the later creation of the Midrash based on scripture.  There is nothing wrong in using the Midrash, if you are interested in a later history.  Indirectly sir, I believe you have supported my view that later creations only submit to the then dominate belief of the Roman-Grecianphils of a young earth creation, thank you.

Manetho - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manetho)

I quote “….Although no sources for the dates of his life and death remain, his work is usually associated with the reigns of Ptolemy I Soter (323-283 BCE) and Ptolemy II Philadelphos (285-246 BCE). If the mention of Manetho in the Hibeh Papyri, dated to 240/1 BCE, is in fact Manetho the author of Aegyptiaca, then he may well have been working during the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-222 BCE) as well. Although he was Egyptian and his topics dealt with Egyptian matters, he wrote solely in Greek. Other works he wrote include Against Herodotus, The Sacred Book, On Antiquity and Religion, On Festivals, On the Preparation of Kyphi, and the Digest of Physics. The astrological treatise Book of Sothis has also been attributed to Manetho. In Aegyptiaca, he coined the term "dynasty" (Greek: dynasteia, abstractly meaning "governmental power") to represent groups of rulers with a common origin….”


The use of the Midrash sir, with its later creation can lead one to deduce that the mentioning of Pepy II in it.  Makes it a copy of Manetho’s work and recorded in Josephus own work.  Where I add we do obtain the better record of Manetho’s earlier non-suriving work.

While Dr. Hawass, Director of Egyptian Department of Anquities agrees with the extremely long reign of Pepy II.  The lastest attested year of his reign is the thirty third census, making serious question about his reign lasting 94 years (Nichols 1992: 89).  The Egyptian census sir, was held about every 2 years which occassional earlier ones if famine was really great (Wilkinson 1995: 113-114).  Myself, I suggest that the 99 years reign of Pepy II finds it origin in the desire to equal or surpass another culture.  Namely the the Sumerian city Adab King Lugal-Anne-Mundu who is credited with a rule of 90 years.   For details See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugal-Anne-Mundu  ruling as he does as an Sumerian not a Semitic would give the Egyptian temple scribes added reason to distort Pepy II’s reign.  Whether or not they did so during or after the Old Kingdom Exodus, I do not believe without better evidence, can be determined.

I tend in my work sir, to accept scripture as sound, and look at the body of evidence to support my work.  Since it starts in the 7th millennium BCE through the reign of Emperor Constantine.  I must say, I have not been denied evidence in fact the evidence is substanial, if we only look.

Archibald Henry Sayce (25 September 1846 - 4 February 1933), the pioneer Assyriologist and linguist is whom you are speaking of when you say “Sayce”?  Pioneers, sir have it hard.  Especially in science (Assyriology) and in languages as you pointed out in your the United Monarchy post dated 11/9/2008. 

You are an Assyriologist, sir?  I ask because you use Hathor and Osiris as examples of Egypt’s Nile flowing red.  Egyptianologists, sir understand that it was Ra, Sekhmet, and Thoth that are in the myth.  In all the myths of Sekhmet’s rage against mankind, it is the land that flows red not the river Nile.  For more please see more Ancient Egyptian Gods; Sekhmet (http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/Sekhmet.html)
Osiris did not come to national prominence until the First Intermediate Period when there was a democratizing of the afterlife that in earlier periods of Egyptian history were so very dependent of Pharaoh’s goodwill.  Again, I am sorry sir. 

You are correct in your statement that Merenptah’s Victory Stele is the first known extra-Biblical mention of Israel.  To lump a group of wandering escape slaves as a people without a city-state as Merenptah does under the stanza of the Princes.  Indicates to me sir that he knew something, modern scholars are unwilling to address.  That Israel of the Divided Kingdom had ‘no seed’.  The preceding New Kingdom dynasty provides multiple indications that the Egyptians had a very good grasp of Canaanite, Syrian, Phoenician geography (give me some more time, and I can quote Dr. Donald Redford on that).  By using simply, the recorded wars of Tuthmose III, to the El Amarna Letters this knowledge of the ancients was extensive. 

Prior to and during the United Monarchy, the Bible records only the term, the sons of Israel after they discarded the term Hebrew.  Do not quote me on this, however I believe scripture keeps the ‘sons of Israel’ pretty much to the united monarchy state, the late pre-monarchy period and centered on the ten tribes that eventually made up the nation state of Israel.

I find it extremely interesting that the Amorites are such a large and important people, Semitic in origins, while the Hebrews scare up so little archaeological evidence.  Could it be, scholars clinging to archaic history confuse them?  They both meet much of the same criteria Semitic, nomads, warriors, and destroyers.  The evidence is not convincing one way, or the other to me as of this time.  Except that, they originated after Sargon the Great, and during the late Egyptian Old Kingdom.

Again, thank you so very much for your time, consideration, and answers.  Such a pleasure it has been discussing this with you I hope, we continue.




Sources other than links:

Akkermans, Peter M. M.G. and Glenn M. Schwartz.  (2005). The Archaeology of Syria: From Complex Hunter- to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16,00-300 BC.)[/]  (Third Printing).   Cambridge.                 
Grimal, Nicolas.  (1992).   A History of Ancient Egypt. (English edition).  (Ian Shaw, trans.)  Blackwell.
McEvedy, Colin.  (2002).  The New Penguin Atlas of Ancient History. (2nd edition).  Penguin. 
Wilkinson, Toby A. H.  (1999).  Early Dynastic Egypt. Routledge.

Chronology of Ancient Egypt - Dr. Zahi Hawass (http://guardians.net/hawass/chronology.htm)

For the convinience of all
the chronology of Dr.Hawass.

turanclancath:)

Quote from: Michael on Nov 08, 2008, 05:49 PM

I would agree that the EB III provides a wonderful background for the Bible's stories. I am soon to publish a book detailing the matter. You forgot to mention the Great Famine that took place during this period.

However, this is just the foundation for a text that was added to over time. There are Iron age references in the text. Hittites lived with Abraham, which seems unlikely in the Early Bronze Age. Egypt didn't have chariots either, such as mentioned in the story of Joseph.

Hence, we see a layering of text over the ages.  There were specific techniques used to add text to ancient literature. These techniques  are discussed by Tigay in his work on Gilgamesh. By knowing these techniques and working backwards, one can deconstruct the text to get an Early Bronze Age document.

The very term "Israel" would not have existed in the Early Bronze Age either.

Dear Michael, first let me say thank you for waiting on me while I gave proper attention to your post.  It is greatly appreciated, sir.

I try very hard not to tamper with scripture again, I am cautious in nature.  Saying that, I would not have pictures of horses or chariots in my Old Kingdom tomb.  During the Old Kingdom one’s afterlife was dependent on ‘your’ Pharaoh to provide you with the hoped for afterlife.  Since, documentation is rather substantial that it was only at the end of the fifth dynasty sir, that Pharaoh decorated his tomb walls at all.  Then it is with the Pyramid Texts not pictures of life hoped for in the afterlife.  Understanding this and that archaeology now can place with reasoned, and scholarly support for horses, and carts into the 3rd millennium I do not share your opinion, I am very sorry sir.  To turn up one’s nose at a form of transportation that saved time as did horses and carts is not within the traditional fashion of Egyptians.  Considered supportive of desired innovations, when everyone was using horses with a degree of skill that indicates long exposure of ‘the new thing’.  Again if allowed anthropology, culture can explain this. 

Donkeys we know today sir, certainly were domesticated within the 4th millennium (a. Akkerman and Schwartz 2005: 2006; b. McEvedy 2002: 26).  Regarding the archaeological remains: in Egypt, there exists the problem of the water table underneath it tends to destroy much the remains, and history especially the further back in time the study is.

The Midrash sir, dates according to my understanding to after Christ, after Manetho for that matter if my understanding is correct.

Midrash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash)

Midrash - AOL Search Reference Center  (http://plus.aol.com/aol/reference/Midrash/Midrash?flv=1)

Therefore, in my most humble opinion the Midrash is suspect regarding scripture, which predates Manetho.  Even the most severe critic of Biblical scripture predates it, to Manetho.  This lends in my view more support for scripture than the later creation of the Midrash based on scripture.  There is nothing wrong in using the Midrash, if you are interested in a later history.  Indirectly sir, I believe you have supported my view that later creations only submit to the then dominate belief of the Roman-Grecianphils of a young earth creation, thank you.

Manetho - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manetho)

I quote “….Although no sources for the dates of his life and death remain, his work is usually associated with the reigns of Ptolemy I Soter (323-283 BCE) and Ptolemy II Philadelphos (285-246 BCE). If the mention of Manetho in the Hibeh Papyri, dated to 240/1 BCE, is in fact Manetho the author of Aegyptiaca, then he may well have been working during the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-222 BCE) as well. Although he was Egyptian and his topics dealt with Egyptian matters, he wrote solely in Greek. Other works he wrote include Against Herodotus, The Sacred Book, On Antiquity and Religion, On Festivals, On the Preparation of Kyphi, and the Digest of Physics. The astrological treatise Book of Sothis has also been attributed to Manetho. In Aegyptiaca, he coined the term "dynasty" (Greek: dynasteia, abstractly meaning "governmental power") to represent groups of rulers with a common origin….”


The use of the Midrash sir, with its later creation can lead one to deduce that the mentioning of Pepy II in it.  Makes it a copy of Manetho’s work and recorded in Josephus own work.  Where I add we do obtain the better record of Manetho’s earlier non-suriving work.

While Dr. Hawass, Director of Egyptian Department of Anquities agrees with the extremely long reign of Pepy II.  The lastest attested year of his reign is the thirty third census, making serious question about his reign lasting 94 years (Nichols 1992: 89).  The Egyptian census sir, was held about every 2 years which occassional earlier ones if famine was really great (Wilkinson 1995: 113-114).  Myself, I suggest that the 99 years reign of Pepy II finds it origin in the desire to equal or surpass another culture.  Namely the the Sumerian city Adab King Lugal-Anne-Mundu who is credited with a rule of 90 years.   For details See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugal-Anne-Mundu  ruling as he does as an Sumerian not a Semitic would give the Egyptian temple scribes added reason to distort Pepy II’s reign.  Whether or not they did so during or after the Old Kingdom Exodus, I do not believe without better evidence, can be determined.

I tend in my work sir, to accept scripture as sound, and look at the body of evidence to support my work.  Since it starts in the 7th millennium BCE through the reign of Emperor Constantine.  I must say, I have not been denied evidence in fact the evidence is substanial, if we only look.

Archibald Henry Sayce (25 September 1846 - 4 February 1933), the pioneer Assyriologist and linguist is whom you are speaking of when you say “Sayce”?  Pioneers, sir have it hard.  Especially in science (Assyriology) and in languages as you pointed out in your the United Monarchy post dated 11/9/2008. 

You are an Assyriologist, sir?  I ask because you use Hathor and Osiris as examples of Egypt’s Nile flowing red.  Egyptianologists, sir understand that it was Ra, Sekhmet, and Thoth that are in the myth.  In all the myths of Sekhmet’s rage against mankind, it is the land that flows red not the river Nile.  For more please see more Ancient Egyptian Gods; Sekhmet (http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/Sekhmet.html)
Osiris did not come to national prominence until the First Intermediate Period when there was a democratizing of the afterlife that in earlier periods of Egyptian history were so very dependent of Pharaoh’s goodwill.  Again, I am sorry sir. 

You are correct in your statement that Merenptah’s Victory Stele is the first known extra-Biblical mention of Israel.  To lump a group of wandering escape slaves as a people without a city-state as Merenptah does under the stanza of the Princes.  Indicates to me sir that he knew something, modern scholars are unwilling to address.  That Israel of the Divided Kingdom had ‘no seed’.  The preceding New Kingdom dynasty provides multiple indications that the Egyptians had a very good grasp of Canaanite, Syrian, Phoenician geography (give me some more time, and I can quote Dr. Donald Redford on that).  By using simply, the recorded wars of Tuthmose III, to the El Amarna Letters this knowledge of the ancients was extensive. 

Prior to and during the United Monarchy, the Bible records only the term, the sons of Israel after they discarded the term Hebrew.  Do not quote me on this, however I believe scripture keeps the ‘sons of Israel’ pretty much to the united monarchy state, the late pre-monarchy period and centered on the ten tribes that eventually made up the nation state of Israel.

I find it extremely interesting that the Amorites are such a large and important people, Semitic in origins, while the Hebrews scare up so little archaeological evidence.  Could it be, scholars clinging to archaic history confuse them?  They both meet much of the same criteria Semitic, nomads, warriors, and destroyers.  The evidence is not convincing one way, or the other to me as of this time.  Except that, they originated after Sargon the Great, and during the late Egyptian Old Kingdom.

Again, thank you so very much for your time, consideration, and answers.  Such a pleasure it has been discussing this with you I hope, we continue.




Sources other than links:

Akkermans, Peter M. M.G. and Glenn M. Schwartz.  (2005). The Archaeology of Syria: From Complex Hunter- to Early Urban Societies (ca. 16,00-300 BC.)[/]  (Third Printing).   Cambridge.                 
Grimal, Nicolas.  (1992).   A History of Ancient Egypt. (English edition).  (Ian Shaw, trans.)  Blackwell.
McEvedy, Colin.  (2002).  The New Penguin Atlas of Ancient History. (2nd edition).  Penguin. 
Wilkinson, Toby A. H.  (1999).  Early Dynastic Egypt. Routledge.

The midrashim, I agree came later, although I have seen estimates as early as 200 BCE for the first writings. Mostly the stories are fanciful an are based upon Greek influence. Some are not. When I had made up my mind that Pepi II was the first pharaoh of Moses, Ithe read the midrash. I thought it was an amazing coincedence that the rabbis perhaps had a long oral tradition about the pharaohs of the Exodus, and that it concendently was the same reign as the pharoah I had selected and the dates of the only pharoah that ever ruled that long.  The midrash was used for confiramtionof information I had already knew.

I am confused by your post. Are you claiming Egypt had chariots before they had chariots because the Bible says so?

The use of Hathor and Osirius was what I found in my sources on the topic. Hathor was an ancient goddess, very much worshipped in the EB III period. The city of Hazor, and EB city was named after her and a Hathor worship center. Osiris was around for quite some time too. He was the constellaton Orion.

Sekhmet seems to have associated with Hathor. The constellation of Draco in Denderah is claimed to be Sekhmet by some scholars and Hathor by others. 

The story of Moses appears to be of asian origin. Egypt did not use pitch to shore up boats. Wax and wet papyrus was used as sealants. Pitch was very rare and was saved for the mummification process. The use of pitch to seal up moses' raft appears to be asian as that was a common asian sealant. The tale of the basket in the river comes from Sargon I. Joseph Campbell claims it is a cosmic myth. Sargon was associated with Marduk. At the vernal equinox Sargon would don the robes of Marduk and play his role in an annual play. Likewise the story of Moses is simply a support narrative to justify the celebration of the vernal equinox (Passover).

Scholars do not believe Israel was ever a slave in Egypt, nor do they believe there was an Exodus from Egypt due to a lack of any influx of Egytian words, names and customs into the existing Canaanite culture.

I am not really big on the tribes and the divided kingdom. There is really no evidence of "Jews" until about the 4th century BCE.  I believe the history of the Jews to have been an Oliver Stone version of the real history in order to unite Judea. It is a collection of Babylonian cosmic myths, interwoven with history and laws.

There are some rogue scholars who are having second thoughts about the orign of the Hebrews and the Jews. With the discovery of the Ebla texts, many are starting, very slowly as scholars alwaysdo, and being very non-committal, to look at the Northern area of the Amorites as the birthplace or home of Judahism.

My dear sir, thank you for your time, and consideration I regret confusing you.  The power of anthropology is tremendous at times.  I am not saying horses or donkeys where in Egypt at all in the Old Kingdom period.  Just that there exists the possibility of them being there, because archaeology has provided the evidence of them.  That dates them to the early third millennium in the care of mankind.  We can always blame redactors for mentioning chariots with Joseph, and Moses if we do not want horses or donkeys in the Old Kingdom.  We just cannot say definitely that they did not.  Science, sir moved forward or is that backward?


With regards to your assessment on the story of Moses being Asiatic in origin, I agree.  Unless C-14 dating does in fact move the Old Kingdom another thousand years back in time.  Sargon I, the Great does use it first.  That does not mean that a Hebrew slave in Egypt did not know the story, and used it to save her youngest son from the fate decreed by pharaonic law.  I find her using pitch ingenious, I can see her begging a bowl or two of resin (and that is what pitch is really especially in Egypt) from fellow slaves to strengthen the longitudal sag inherited in a long narrow reed basket.  The basket handle would be working much as the hog-tressing famous in Egyptian ship description from the 4th through the 18th dynasty.  In such a vessel, Moses would be safe for sometime from sinking anyway.


I find the scholars have more or less thrown out the Bible, in favor of Josephus and Archbishop Ussher works neither known for their archaeological skills to be honest.  Therefore, granny here reading and wanting to write decided to reevaluate once again, the current standing of scholarly overview of Biblical history.  Resulting in my being here and I am so happy to be here writing with such fine people like yourself, Kattey, Moses, and my most dear Turanclancath.  Thank you Michael, for your attention, it is appreciated.

To you and yours a nice day, as to all.

My dear sir, thank you for your time, and consideration I regret confusing you.  The power of anthropology is tremendous at times.  I am not saying horses or donkeys where in Egypt at all in the Old Kingdom period.  Just that there exists the possibility of them being there, because archaeology has provided the evidence of them.  That dates them to the early third millennium in the care of mankind.  We can always blame redactors for mentioning chariots with Joseph, and Moses if we do not want horses or donkeys in the Old Kingdom.  We just cannot say definitely that they did not.  Science, sir moved forward or is that backward?


With regards to your assessment on the story of Moses being Asiatic in origin, I agree.  Unless C-14 dating does in fact move the Old Kingdom another thousand years back in time.  Sargon I, the Great does use it first.  That does not mean that a Hebrew slave in Egypt did not know the story, and used it to save her youngest son from the fate decreed by pharaonic law.  I find her using pitch ingenious, I can see her begging a bowl or two of resin (and that is what pitch is really especially in Egypt) from fellow slaves to strengthen the longitudal sag inherited in a long narrow reed basket.  The basket handle would be working much as the hog-tressing famous in Egyptian ship description from the 4th through the 18th dynasty.  In such a vessel, Moses would be safe for sometime from sinking anyway.


I find the scholars have more or less thrown out the Bible, in favor of Josephus and Archbishop Ussher works neither known for their archaeological skills to be honest.  Therefore, granny here reading and wanting to write decided to reevaluate once again, the current standing of scholarly overview of Biblical history.  Resulting in my being here and I am so happy to be here writing with such fine people like yourself, Kattey, Moses, and my most dear Turanclancath.  Thank you Michael, for your attention, it is appreciated.

To you and yours a nice day, as to all.

Why beg for pitch when some wax or wet papyrus was around? I don't see it. The pitch ties into the story of Sargon (Asian) and the name Moses (Masu) being Asian. 

Josephus was an historian, but back then they wrote history the way Oliver Stone wrote history. They were not beyond embellishing history or making their opinions facts, i.e. Josephus believing the Hyksos were the Hebrews of the Exodus.

My claim is that the story of Moses is derived from the same cosmic myth as that of Sargon and Marduk, separated by only  a few centuries. It concerns the vernal equinox. For Sargon the vernal equinox is Taurus the bull(golden calf). For Moses it is the Pleaides, which was considered by the Hebrews as part of Aries (the lamb.) Later Bacchus/Dionysus would have a similar tale except it would not include the Pleiades, just Aries which accounts for differences and well as the similarities.

The chariots in Egypt, again I believe show an Asian viewpoint as the pitch.

Why beg for pitch when some wax or wet papyrus was around? I don't see it. The pitch ties into the story of Sargon (Asian) and the name Moses (Masu) being Asian. 

Josephus was an historian, but back then they wrote history the way Oliver Stone wrote history. They were not beyond embellishing history or making their opinions facts, i.e. Josephus believing the Hyksos were the Hebrews of the Exodus.

My claim is that the story of Moses is derived from the same cosmic myth as that of Sargon and Marduk, separated by only  a few centuries. It concerns the vernal equinox. For Sargon the vernal equinox is Taurus the bull(golden calf). For Moses it is the Pleaides, which was considered by the Hebrews as part of Aries (the lamb.) Later Bacchus/Dionysus would have a similar tale except it would not include the Pleiades, just Aries which accounts for differences and well as the similarities.

The chariots in Egypt, again I believe show an Asian viewpoint as the pitch.

Why would a slave woman beg for resin?  Well, in the Old Kingdom it was very important and costly item used by the rich for the preservation of their mummy.  It was frequently imported into Egypt because Egypt did not possess the kind of trees needed for resin production.  I am not aware of wax being plentiful in an Old Kingdom setting sir.  Oil was used for lighting, and clay for sealing.  Slaves could obtain their wants and needs in clever ways our own history in slavery shows this.

The name Moses being Egyptian or Asian in origin is not a problem for me period.  The problem begins when we consider Moses as the name his people called him and his subtitles Law Giver, and Liberator.

While the last fully Egyptian King prior (?) Hyksos is the first to use the ending mose in his name.  It is a common name ending in the late 17th and early 18th dynasty where we see the Theban based pharaohs fighting for 'liberation' from the Hyksos.  Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose I find this very interesting.

If the classical era historians are basically setting up the example for Oliver Stone history.  Why do we still defer to them over archaeological findings from the last 20-30 years?

Not knowing your sources sir, I am cautious in dismissing them but my own sources claim that Dagon was Sargon's the Great God, he did not cast himself as Dagon.  His grandson Naran Sin came the closet to that and in the end was censored for this "sin."  According to my primary source Marduk was hailed and elevated by Hammurabi.  Making him in my humble opinion all things considered the Biblical Cushon-Rastathaim, King of Mesopotamia of the early Judges period) Judges 3:8.  Please see link for more on this.

Cushan-rishathaim uncovered (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=454.0)

Again it has been most pleasurable in discussing this with you sir.  To you and yours a great day, at to all.

Sources:
Saggs, H.W.F.  (2000). People of the Past Babylonians.  California.  pages 98-108.

Stiebing, Jr. William H. (2003).  Ancient Near Eastern History and Culture. Longman.  pages 65-71.

Quote from: Michael on Nov 14, 2008, 03:15 PM

Why beg for pitch when some wax or wet papyrus was around? I don't see it. The pitch ties into the story of Sargon (Asian) and the name Moses (Masu) being Asian. 

Josephus was an historian, but back then they wrote history the way Oliver Stone wrote history. They were not beyond embellishing history or making their opinions facts, i.e. Josephus believing the Hyksos were the Hebrews of the Exodus.

My claim is that the story of Moses is derived from the same cosmic myth as that of Sargon and Marduk, separated by only  a few centuries. It concerns the vernal equinox. For Sargon the vernal equinox is Taurus the bull(golden calf). For Moses it is the Pleaides, which was considered by the Hebrews as part of Aries (the lamb.) Later Bacchus/Dionysus would have a similar tale except it would not include the Pleiades, just Aries which accounts for differences and well as the similarities.

The chariots in Egypt, again I believe show an Asian viewpoint as the pitch.

Why would a slave woman beg for resin?  Well, in the Old Kingdom it was very important and costly item used by the rich for the preservation of their mummy.  It was frequently imported into Egypt because Egypt did not possess the kind of trees needed for resin production.  I am not aware of wax being plentiful in an Old Kingdom setting sir.  Oil was used for lighting, and clay for sealing.  Slaves could obtain their wants and needs in clever ways our own history in slavery shows this.

The name Moses being Egyptian or Asian in origin is not a problem for me period.  The problem begins when we consider Moses as the name his people called him and his subtitles Law Giver, and Liberator.

While the last fully Egyptian King prior (?) Hyksos is the first to use the ending mose in his name.  It is a common name ending in the late 17th and early 18th dynasty where we see the Theban based pharaohs fighting for 'liberation' from the Hyksos.  Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose I find this very interesting.

If the classical era historians are basically setting up the example for Oliver Stone history.  Why do we still defer to them over archaeological findings from the last 20-30 years?

Not knowing your sources sir, I am cautious in dismissing them but my own sources claim that Dagon was Sargon's the Great God, he did not cast himself as Dagon.  His grandson Naran Sin came the closet to that and in the end was censored for this "sin."  According to my primary source Marduk was hailed and elevated by Hammurabi.  Making him in my humble opinion all things considered the Biblical Cushon-Rastathaim, King of Mesopotamia of the early Judges period) Judges 3:8.  Please see link for more on this.

Cushan-rishathaim uncovered (http://forum.bib-arch.info/index.php?topic=454.0)

Again it has been most pleasurable in discussing this with you sir.  To you and yours a great day, at to all.

Sources:
Saggs, H.W.F.  (2000). People of the Past Babylonians.  California.  pages 98-108.

Stiebing, Jr. William H. (2003).  Ancient Near Eastern History and Culture. Longman.  pages 65-71.

I never made the claim Dagon was Sargon's god. It was Marduk, or AMAR.UTU. You are confusing my posts.  At the vernal equinox the Akkadian King would don the robes of Marduk and defeat chaos.


 
 
 
Encyclopedia > Zagmuk NationMaster - Encyclopedia: Zagmuk (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Zagmuk)
Zagmuk is a Mesopotamian festival celebrated around the vernal equinox, which literally means "beginning of the year". It celebrates the triumph of Marduk, the patron deity of Babylon, over the forces of chaos, symbolized in later times by Tiamet. The battle between Marduk and chaos lasts 12 days, as does the festival of Zagmuk. In Uruk the festival was associated with the god An, the Sumerian god of the night sky. Both are essentially equivalent in all respects to the Akkadian "akitu" festival. In some variations, Marduk is slain by Tiamet and resurrected on the vernal equinox.[1] Mesopotamia was a cradle of civilization geographically located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, largely corresponding to modern-day Iraq. ... Illumination of Earth by Sun on the day of equinox The vernal equinox (or spring equinox) marks the beginning of astronomical spring. ... Marduk (Sumerian spelling in Akkadian: AMAR.UTU solar calf; Biblical: Merodach) was the Babylonian name of a late-generation god from ancient Mesopotamia and patron deity of the city of Babylon, who, when Babylon permanently became the political center of the Euphrates valley in the time of Hammurabi (18th century... For other uses, see Babylon (disambiguation). ...


In Babylon, the battle was acted out at the royal court with the king playing Marduk, and his son-rescuer as Nabu, the god of writing. Once freed from the powers of the underworld, the king would enact the rite of the Sacred Marriage on the 10th day of the ceremony. During this rite, the king (or En, as he was known in Sumer) would perform sexual intercourse with his spouse, normally a high priestess who had been chosen from among the "naditum," a special class of priestesses who had taken a vow not of celibacy precisely, but of a refusal to bear children. The high priestess was known as the entu, and her ritual act of intercourse with the king was thought to regenerate the cosmos through a reenactment of the primordial coupling of the cosmic parents An and Ki, who had brought the world into being at the dawn of Time. If an eclipse of the sun fell on any of the 12 days of the ceremony, a substitute for the king was put in his place, since it was thought that any evils which might have befallen the king would accrue to the substitute instead. On the last day of the festival, the king was slain so that he could battle at Marduk's side. To spare their king, Mesopotamians often utilized a mock king, played by a crimimal who was anointed as king before the start of Zagmuk, and killed on the last day.


In addition to the prisoner who was killed, it was traditional for one prisoner to be set free during this ceremony to provide balance. Thus, the background for what later became Passover and then Easter is clearly visible here, for during Christ's crucifixion on Passover, the thief Barabbas was set free and Christ was crucified at the behest of the crowd.

Sargon of Akkad: Information from Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/sargon-of-akkad#wp-_note-29)

Famine and war threatened Sargon's empire during the latter years of his reign. The Chronicle of Early Kings reports that revolts broke out throughout the area under the last years of his overlordship:

“ Afterward in his [Sargon's] old age all the lands revolted against him, and they besieged him in Akkad; and Sargon went forth to battle and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and heir widespreading host he destroyed. Afterward he attacked the land of Subartu in his might, and they submitted to his arms, and Sargon settled that revolt, and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and their widespreading host he destroyed, and he brought their possessions into Akkad. The soil from the trenches of Babylon he removed, and the boundaries of Akkad he made like those of Babylon. But because of the evil which he had committed, the great lord Marduk was angry, and he destroyed his people by famine. From the rising of the sun unto the setting of the sun they opposed him and gave him no rest.[31]

Marduk's Akkadian name was known as AMAR.UTU. Marduk is spelled AMAR.UTU in Sumerian, literally, "the calf of Utu" or "the young bull of the Sun". Marduk was not a major god in Sargon's age, just the solar god of the vernal equinox.







 
 
 
 

I never made the claim Dagon was Sargon's god. It was Marduk, or AMAR.UTU. You are confusing my posts.  At the vernal equinox the Akkadian King would don the robes of Marduk and defeat chaos.


 
 
 
Encyclopedia > Zagmuk NationMaster - Encyclopedia: Zagmuk (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Zagmuk)
Zagmuk is a Mesopotamian festival celebrated around the vernal equinox, which literally means "beginning of the year". It celebrates the triumph of Marduk, the patron deity of Babylon, over the forces of chaos, symbolized in later times by Tiamet. The battle between Marduk and chaos lasts 12 days, as does the festival of Zagmuk. In Uruk the festival was associated with the god An, the Sumerian god of the night sky. Both are essentially equivalent in all respects to the Akkadian "akitu" festival. In some variations, Marduk is slain by Tiamet and resurrected on the vernal equinox.[1] Mesopotamia was a cradle of civilization geographically located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, largely corresponding to modern-day Iraq. ... Illumination of Earth by Sun on the day of equinox The vernal equinox (or spring equinox) marks the beginning of astronomical spring. ... Marduk (Sumerian spelling in Akkadian: AMAR.UTU solar calf; Biblical: Merodach) was the Babylonian name of a late-generation god from ancient Mesopotamia and patron deity of the city of Babylon, who, when Babylon permanently became the political center of the Euphrates valley in the time of Hammurabi (18th century... For other uses, see Babylon (disambiguation). ...


In Babylon, the battle was acted out at the royal court with the king playing Marduk, and his son-rescuer as Nabu, the god of writing. Once freed from the powers of the underworld, the king would enact the rite of the Sacred Marriage on the 10th day of the ceremony. During this rite, the king (or En, as he was known in Sumer) would perform sexual intercourse with his spouse, normally a high priestess who had been chosen from among the "naditum," a special class of priestesses who had taken a vow not of celibacy precisely, but of a refusal to bear children. The high priestess was known as the entu, and her ritual act of intercourse with the king was thought to regenerate the cosmos through a reenactment of the primordial coupling of the cosmic parents An and Ki, who had brought the world into being at the dawn of Time. If an eclipse of the sun fell on any of the 12 days of the ceremony, a substitute for the king was put in his place, since it was thought that any evils which might have befallen the king would accrue to the substitute instead. On the last day of the festival, the king was slain so that he could battle at Marduk's side. To spare their king, Mesopotamians often utilized a mock king, played by a crimimal who was anointed as king before the start of Zagmuk, and killed on the last day.


In addition to the prisoner who was killed, it was traditional for one prisoner to be set free during this ceremony to provide balance. Thus, the background for what later became Passover and then Easter is clearly visible here, for during Christ's crucifixion on Passover, the thief Barabbas was set free and Christ was crucified at the behest of the crowd.

Sargon of Akkad: Information from Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/sargon-of-akkad#wp-_note-29)

Famine and war threatened Sargon's empire during the latter years of his reign. The Chronicle of Early Kings reports that revolts broke out throughout the area under the last years of his overlordship:

“ Afterward in his [Sargon's] old age all the lands revolted against him, and they besieged him in Akkad; and Sargon went forth to battle and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and heir widespreading host he destroyed. Afterward he attacked the land of Subartu in his might, and they submitted to his arms, and Sargon settled that revolt, and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and their widespreading host he destroyed, and he brought their possessions into Akkad. The soil from the trenches of Babylon he removed, and the boundaries of Akkad he made like those of Babylon. But because of the evil which he had committed, the great lord Marduk was angry, and he destroyed his people by famine. From the rising of the sun unto the setting of the sun they opposed him and gave him no rest.[31]

Marduk's Akkadian name was known as AMAR.UTU. Marduk is spelled AMAR.UTU in Sumerian, literally, "the calf of Utu" or "the young bull of the Sun". Marduk was not a major god in Sargon's age, just the solar god of the vernal equinox.


 
 
 

No sir, I am not confused at all.  My sources state that Dagon is Sargon's god.  You want me to accept a much later local Babylonian god Marduk as Sargon's.  This is not possible unless you are simply using a redactor's lack of knowledge of history and laziness in substituting of AMAR.UTU to agree with Marduk.  I am very sorry sir, I am not confused although perhaps I can see why you would like me to be.

I am very sorry sir.  Hammurabi, of Babylon 1st Dynasty, elevated Marduk as the primary god of the Akkadian speaking world.

Quote from: Michael on Nov 15, 2008, 11:54 AM

I never made the claim Dagon was Sargon's god. It was Marduk, or AMAR.UTU. You are confusing my posts.  At the vernal equinox the Akkadian King would don the robes of Marduk and defeat chaos.


 
 
 
Encyclopedia > Zagmuk NationMaster - Encyclopedia: Zagmuk (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Zagmuk)
Zagmuk is a Mesopotamian festival celebrated around the vernal equinox, which literally means "beginning of the year". It celebrates the triumph of Marduk, the patron deity of Babylon, over the forces of chaos, symbolized in later times by Tiamet. The battle between Marduk and chaos lasts 12 days, as does the festival of Zagmuk. In Uruk the festival was associated with the god An, the Sumerian god of the night sky. Both are essentially equivalent in all respects to the Akkadian "akitu" festival. In some variations, Marduk is slain by Tiamet and resurrected on the vernal equinox.[1] Mesopotamia was a cradle of civilization geographically located between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, largely corresponding to modern-day Iraq. ... Illumination of Earth by Sun on the day of equinox The vernal equinox (or spring equinox) marks the beginning of astronomical spring. ... Marduk (Sumerian spelling in Akkadian: AMAR.UTU solar calf; Biblical: Merodach) was the Babylonian name of a late-generation god from ancient Mesopotamia and patron deity of the city of Babylon, who, when Babylon permanently became the political center of the Euphrates valley in the time of Hammurabi (18th century... For other uses, see Babylon (disambiguation). ...


In Babylon, the battle was acted out at the royal court with the king playing Marduk, and his son-rescuer as Nabu, the god of writing. Once freed from the powers of the underworld, the king would enact the rite of the Sacred Marriage on the 10th day of the ceremony. During this rite, the king (or En, as he was known in Sumer) would perform sexual intercourse with his spouse, normally a high priestess who had been chosen from among the "naditum," a special class of priestesses who had taken a vow not of celibacy precisely, but of a refusal to bear children. The high priestess was known as the entu, and her ritual act of intercourse with the king was thought to regenerate the cosmos through a reenactment of the primordial coupling of the cosmic parents An and Ki, who had brought the world into being at the dawn of Time. If an eclipse of the sun fell on any of the 12 days of the ceremony, a substitute for the king was put in his place, since it was thought that any evils which might have befallen the king would accrue to the substitute instead. On the last day of the festival, the king was slain so that he could battle at Marduk's side. To spare their king, Mesopotamians often utilized a mock king, played by a crimimal who was anointed as king before the start of Zagmuk, and killed on the last day.


In addition to the prisoner who was killed, it was traditional for one prisoner to be set free during this ceremony to provide balance. Thus, the background for what later became Passover and then Easter is clearly visible here, for during Christ's crucifixion on Passover, the thief Barabbas was set free and Christ was crucified at the behest of the crowd.

Sargon of Akkad: Information from Answers.com (http://www.answers.com/topic/sargon-of-akkad#wp-_note-29)

Famine and war threatened Sargon's empire during the latter years of his reign. The Chronicle of Early Kings reports that revolts broke out throughout the area under the last years of his overlordship:

“ Afterward in his [Sargon's] old age all the lands revolted against him, and they besieged him in Akkad; and Sargon went forth to battle and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and heir widespreading host he destroyed. Afterward he attacked the land of Subartu in his might, and they submitted to his arms, and Sargon settled that revolt, and defeated them; he accomplished their overthrow, and their widespreading host he destroyed, and he brought their possessions into Akkad. The soil from the trenches of Babylon he removed, and the boundaries of Akkad he made like those of Babylon. But because of the evil which he had committed, the great lord Marduk was angry, and he destroyed his people by famine. From the rising of the sun unto the setting of the sun they opposed him and gave him no rest.[31]

Marduk's Akkadian name was known as AMAR.UTU. Marduk is spelled AMAR.UTU in Sumerian, literally, "the calf of Utu" or "the young bull of the Sun". Marduk was not a major god in Sargon's age, just the solar god of the vernal equinox.


 
 
 

No sir, I am not confused at all.  My sources state that Dagon is Sargon's god.  You want me to accept a much later local Babylonian god Marduk as Sargon's.  This is not possible unless you are simply using a redactor's lack of knowledge of history and laziness in substituting of AMAR.UTU to agree with Marduk.  I am very sorry sir, I am not confused although perhaps I can see why you would like me to be.

I am very sorry sir.  Hammurabi, of Babylon 1st Dynasty, elevated Marduk as the primary god of the Akkadian speaking world.

It is immaterial if Hammurabi elevated an existing god to the supreme god. My point is that argon acted in the role of that god at the vernal equinox as part of his kingly duties. Marduk didn't have to be the chief god.

Dagon wasn't even a Babylonian/Sumerian/Akkadian god.  When Sargon conquered northen Mesopatamia he venerated Dagon, i.e. paid his respects to the god of the conquered people. That was not his surpreme god. The supreme god would be the moon god Sin. That would be his main diety. He appointed his own daughter to be the priestess of the moon god. She would be the earthly representation of Ishtar (Venus) te consort of the moon god. They would give birth to the sun god. (Early version of the conception of Jesus as Ishtar was also Virgo, the virgin.) Marduk represented the sun of the vernal equinox, which was in the zodiac sign of Taurus.

AMAR.UTU is the early Akkadian version of Marduk. I don't believe James Pritchard would appreciate you calling him lazy.

  Dear Forumists :)

A friend of mine posted this in another Forum.

About Weels Chariots and horses.



403 Forbidden (http://books.google.com/books/princeton?hl=en&q=&vid=ISBN9780691058870&btnG.x=7&btnG.y=13)


and here  are  the chapters  of the book.
chapter 10- 14 are most interesting for our chariot discussion.
chapter 13 pag 306 why not a kurgan culture ?

 shows its a
derivated Gimbutas hypothesis

Table of Contents for Anthony, D.: The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. (http://press.princeton.edu/TOCs/c8488.html)









Seems interesting .

Saluti :) Turanclancath :)







 have an excellent book to suggest: The Horse, The Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World by David W. Anthony. It was published by Princeton University Press in 2007. The author is professor of anthropology at Hartwick College, and has done archaeological work in the Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
 
His premise is that half the world's population speaks languages derived from a shared linguistic source, Proto-Indo-European. His study examines the early speakers of this 'mother tongue' and offers a theory of how the early inhabitants of the Steppes, with their use of horses and the wheel spread the early language, and thereby 'changed' the world.   
 
It is an academic work, full of graphs and illustrations. I am delighted to recommend it, and look forward to completing my own reading of it!

Book seems very interesting, but doesn't seem to mention Judea or  Egypt. Hebrew derives from Egypt, which in turn comes from sub-Saraha Africa.
Nor did I see where he discusses the Metal Ages of this region. It is a concentration of Indo-European languages.

 I don't believe James Pritchard would appreciate you calling him lazy.

Most excellent, excellent sir!  Thank you for disclosing your source James Pritchard.  Not having this knowledge before Michael, I was being cautious in calling the unknown as a redactor.  Redactors, sir tend to denote a more ancient time in history, at least to me.  I ask sir, is James Prichard the Dr. James Bennett Pritchard?  (Please see below.)

James B. Pritchard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_B._Pritchard)
I quote…”James Bennett Pritchard (October 4, 1909 – January 1, 1997) was an American archeologist whose work explicated the interrelationships of the religions of ancient Israel, Canaan, Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon….”

If he is, I can better assess your source.  I did not call him lazy sir, I am sorry I have to disagree with you on that.  I called the unknown source first a redactor and questioned the unknown ability.  Now assuming him to be Dr. James B. Pritchard, I can say he is expired and his work concerning the Sea Peoples outdated by newer studies such as The Phoenicians by Sabatino Moscati (Ed.) 1999 first published in 1997: the year of both of these two scholars death.  Dr. Moscati had a long history as a champion of the Semitic Phoenicians.  I will quote him again…from the above book, page 11.

“At this point it is not difficult to understand how, until about 25 years ago, the very existence of Phoenician studies constituted a subject for debate.”  Sabatino Moscati.

Now I can better understand this quote from Dr. Moscati, thank you and for reminding me, of Dr. Prichard, professor of religious thought and the first curator of Biblical archaeology at the Pennsylvania University Museum.  Myself sir, the choice of a Biblical archaeologist and professor of religious thought, is not the source I would use in dealing with a specific people.  Better in my, humble opinion to use the recognized, even if expired as well, an acknowledged expert in the specific field of interest.

Regarding Dagon, I would assert he is a forerunner to the classical Greek god Poseidon, god of sailors, traders, and the ocean.

Dagon the Fish-God (http://www.bible-history.com/past/dagon.html)

Please note the picture of Dagon, god of the Philistines- related to the classical Greeks as per my investigation has led me to conclude.

I do agree that the vernal equinox was an extremely important celebration of life in surviving the hardships of winter in all ancient cultures.

Again, a most excellent post Michael and thank you for it.

Please have a great day: to yours, as to all.

My dear sir, Turanclancath!  Thank you for the links!

Book seems very interesting, but doesn't seem to mention Judea or  Egypt. Hebrew derives from Egypt, which in turn comes from sub-Saraha Africa.
Nor did I see where he discusses the Metal Ages of this region. It is a concentration of Indo-European languages.

I agree with you on the lack of mention of Judea or Egypt in the work.  Be that as it may be, it does not infer that they are excluded.  Anthropology and archaeology makes it clear that they could have.  The lack of mentioning of the Near East makes it clear to me that many modern scholars are not going to tackle traditional mistakes of early archaeologists in their declarative statements regarding peoples they knew only from their Bibles.

I can say with hope of further challenges to the "traditional thoughts" that this year Dr. Hawass Egypt's Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities has started addressing the problem.  I am referring to his program on the reassessment of the 4th dynasty Pharaoh Djedefre long considered a murdering upstart.  Studies that are more current indicate he was not what generations were taught.  Thank you, Dr. Hawass!

To all a great day.

Quote from: Michael on Nov 15, 2008, 07:23 PM

 I don't believe James Pritchard would appreciate you calling him lazy.

Most excellent, excellent sir!  Thank you for disclosing your source James Pritchard.  Not having this knowledge before Michael, I was being cautious in calling the unknown as a redactor.  Redactors, sir tend to denote a more ancient time in history, at least to me.  I ask sir, is James Prichard the Dr. James Bennett Pritchard?  (Please see below.)

James B. Pritchard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_B._Pritchard)
I quote…”James Bennett Pritchard (October 4, 1909 – January 1, 1997) was an American archeologist whose work explicated the interrelationships of the religions of ancient Israel, Canaan, Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon….”

If he is, I can better assess your source.  I did not call him lazy sir, I am sorry I have to disagree with you on that.  I called the unknown source first a redactor and questioned the unknown ability.  Now assuming him to be Dr. James B. Pritchard, I can say he is expired and his work concerning the Sea Peoples outdated by newer studies such as The Phoenicians by Sabatino Moscati (Ed.) 1999 first published in 1997: the year of both of these two scholars death.  Dr. Moscati had a long history as a champion of the Semitic Phoenicians.  I will quote him again…from the above book, page 11.

“At this point it is not difficult to understand how, until about 25 years ago, the very existence of Phoenician studies constituted a subject for debate.”  Sabatino Moscati.

Now I can better understand this quote from Dr. Moscati, thank you and for reminding me, of Dr. Prichard, professor of religious thought and the first curator of Biblical archaeology at the Pennsylvania University Museum.  Myself sir, the choice of a Biblical archaeologist and professor of religious thought, is not the source I would use in dealing with a specific people.  Better in my, humble opinion to use the recognized, even if expired as well, an acknowledged expert in the specific field of interest.

Regarding Dagon, I would assert he is a forerunner to the classical Greek god Poseidon, god of sailors, traders, and the ocean.

Dagon the Fish-God (http://www.bible-history.com/past/dagon.html)

Please note the picture of Dagon, god of the Philistines- related to the classical Greeks as per my investigation has led me to conclude.

I do agree that the vernal equinox was an extremely important celebration of life in surviving the hardships of winter in all ancient cultures.

Again, a most excellent post Michael and thank you for it.

Please have a great day: to yours, as to all.

Dagon is both a fish and grain god worshipped by both the Phiistines and Phoenecians.  His star is represented in the Southern Fish. This star not only represented Dagon, the temple destroyed by Samson, but also represented the winter equinox in the early Bronze Age. Coincedental that the blinded sun-god Samson (Samson from Shamash) would pull down the temple of Dagon after he had his hair cut off and blinded (signs of the winter equinox for a solar diety.).  I claim they are related in a larger cosmic tale.

Other writers later connect Dagon with Oannes, the fish god, who some claim was the basis for the story of John the Baptist.

In any case the fish god and symbol became popular again circa 200 BCE as the vernal equinox moved into the zodiac sign of Pisces. The lamb would give way to the two fish.  The sign of the 2 fish was used by early Christians in the catacombs of Rome and was used as a floor decoration at the oldest known Christian prayer hall at Meggido.

HEY, IS THAT THE SIGN OF PISCES ON THE FLOOR!!!!

for Christians & Messianic Jews - Megiddo Mosaic, incribed:  To God Jesus Christ (http://prorege-forum.com/forum_entry.php?id=2578&page=0&category=archeology&order=time&PHPSESSID=e1b11)

Dear Forum Friends .

Of course    ,the book doesnt  study Mesopotamia ,Egypt Judea etc  .

See the description in the link 403.
The book  studies proto Indo European and the relation with horse wheel ,chariot.

So it sticks to its subject !   Thats academic very good.Stick to your subject in paper and in Dr Dissertation alike

Its an  elaboration of Gimbutas Kurgan theory .


The horse , chariot , wheel etc in Egypt ,Judea etc would be  another book in another time frame .

Perhaps for one of us :):):) Or together a paper ? We are so learned after all .:)

Turanclancath :)

the necrology of Prof Sabbatino Moscati .
A great Scholar and Human !

 Sabatino Moscati, Linguist, Is Dead at 74  - New York Times (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D00E1DB1439F933A2575AC0A961958260)


and here on Google his master work about the Phunicians


to my surprise it is already 20 years old ( first Italian edition 1988 )


Are there newer books ?

403 Forbidden (http://books.google.com/books/ibtauris?q=&hl=en&vid=ISBN9781850435334&btnG=Search)


and her a short bibliography  on Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=sabatino+moscati&fulltext=Search&ns0=1&redirs=0


Turanclancath :)

Deuteronomy 31:14-16; 32:48-52; 34:1-7.  For those who do not remember or do not know the verses listed pertain to the death of Moses.

It is these verses that since the earliest acceptance of Biblical texts in Jewish and Christian societies (post 311 C.E.).  That we find objections surfacing that Moses ‘could not have written the account of his own death.’  It is only logical to agree with this assessment.  That is unless one is familiar, with a type of Egyptian text that had been forgotten until the late 19th century C.E.  This is the literary work of an author writing of his own death with the Instructions of Amenemhet I , providing the best evidence of this writing technique dating to the early Middle Kingdom.

Please see Writing, of Miracles, and Exodus (http://forum.bib-arch.org/index.php?topic=518.msg4558#new)

Can we reason that with commonality of miracles and the technique of the so-called author writing of his own death?  All dating to and prior to the 12th dynasty of Egypt, shows us that by dating the Patriarchs earlier than tradition allows, is possibly the solution to finding them?

Ignoring the many current chronologies from all of us inspired newcomers in the world of internet millions of authors succeeding the hundreds of former favored revered writers by publishers and universities, and considering onlhy those authors preceding 1700 AD, the chronologies clearly indicate a correlation between the year of Peleg's death as being the same as the death year of Unas (5th dynasty). I refuse to give 10-page details anymore; it wont change anyone's mind.

But rather I now precede to the next comment, that the calendar was created 340 years after Flood and is a Middle Kingdom creation. Though 340 years after such Flood years . . .
[ as Egypt 3090 BC (Ramses 1290 BC found in the 280 BC Septuagint), and Greek 2958 BC (derived in 776 BC found in the 280 BC Septuagint), and agrees with Moslem 3122 BC (derived in 622 AD) and Mayan 3114 BC (Copan 1313 BC) ]
. . . does claim Old Kingdom for the 365-day calendar, according to Richard Parker there is no texts existing of Old KIngdom dates; they are all Middle Kingdom. Placing 340 years after Floods such as 2400 BC /2370 BC /2349 BC will all fall at Peleg's death beginning the Middle Kingdom. Such calendar to be Sothic July 12 Thebes or July 17 Memphis must start with Phamenoth instead of Thoth. Though Though immediately gains winter solstice status in 2000 BC as Jan 6 as the first day of seasonal year.

People forget that from Adam bickering with Eve and then Cain bickering with Abel, the bible issue is that of truth and lie (not just right and wrong) and this then leads to Moses as right when a whole country with its kings and priests and schools are wrong while one man Moses is right. Now the question then arises are each of you new scholars now to be the new truth while the whole world wrong. I do not deny the bible the claim that the whole world is all wrong, I argue which one of us single individuals is right. Do not ask me if it is me, because I have no answer other than God proves, does prove, and will prove.

Carbon-14 says the tombs of Ur are 2030 BC though the bible indicates that suicide followed the year after Peleg died when Nahor called his grandson Haran back to Ur to be part of it with him. Creating dates back to 7000 BC is easily done since the carbon is less for every decade back to the Flood. Jericho has a false 7000 BC for its 2237 BC.

As for Abram, his life of 75 years contrasts the 75 Egyptian years and 76 Sothic years (Julian) for the moon (3x 25 = 3x309m, and 4x 19 = 4x 235m). In doing so the probilities of comparing leap days exists best with the 365-day calendar, as well as the 25 year lunar calendar is useless in dates of 360 days. This is every indication that Abram used the 365-day calendar that we find only as Middle KIngdom dates and no Old Kingdom dates exist of. Again this then places Abram after 2030 BC, and Jacob /Joseph in the days of Hamurabi. Confirmation of Jacob fathering Judah when Nimrod dies in ADam's year 2256 at age 500 is 1770 BC; confirmation of Jacob leaving Syria in 1761 BC after he hears Mari has been conquered by Hamurabi; confirmation of his then giving Judah's favor as king of kings (replacing Nimrod's death in 1770 BC) over to Joseph with a coat at age 17 when in 1750 BC Hamurabi then dies as king of kings. The November 1 ALL SAINTS DAY of 360-day new year (Noah's calendar year 944 in 2031 BC) is transferred to Pharaoh and Joseph when in 1738 BC the Thoth 1 date leaps back to Nov 1 promising 7 years before famine. The law of Moses accurately prophecies and predicts that a 7th year squeezed out of land will produce famine, and so must lie cropless to grow wild and restore minerals. Otherwise a famine will and does begin in 1730 BC. Iin the Seder Olam with year 2105 BC as Flood it assumes 292 to Abram's birth and this additional 83 years to the year Abram takes Hagar and affiliates it with famine in the land. All chronologies will cross on exact years that then claim a different event or different definition of same event. This is the only reason I bring up the Seder here to show you that mistakes are confirmations in reverse.

Thus as some will insist it be 400-430 years from Joseph to exodus, they ignore that the span is not in Egypt but that of being aliens in any country including Canaan. They also ignore that the mass population is not that of procreating their own family or genes or flesh, but rather of being and proving to be the slavation of other aliens already in those countries who will now be saved by leaving with them and declaring themselves to be citizens of Israel. This is why both are correct, Hyksos are not Israel they were there first, and Hyksos are Israel, they were saved by Israel by leaving with them. Thus it is not a matter of procreating your own church but includes pride in conversion of others. Further, those who migrated out at the time of slavery at the birth of Aaron /Moses are not massive enough to be regarded as the Hyksos expulsion and yet indeed they left long ago before Israel. The record states they left in the 518th year (being 517 years from Peleg's death when they entered until the Exodus 2030-1513 BC). This is dated by Greece /Rome as Toth 1 on Sep 6 of 1514 BC because they presume the Epagum days were not moved and did begin on September 1. Instead the days were in March before Pamenoth, omitted March 4 in 1513 BC (but not by Persia) and placed on August 31. (Persia's epagum falls on Sep 5 five days later because they did not omit March 4, and so this secondary civil calendar shifted 5 days from Egypt sets on a shelf until Artaxerxes enforces it in 474 BC and Zoroaster in 388 BC (though moving the five epagum days from Thoth to Koyak; reiterated as moving the five Gatha days from Deh to Furvurdeen).

They also ignore that the mass population is not that or procreating their own family or genes or flesh, but rather of being and proving to be the slavation of other aliens already in those countries who will now be saved by leaving with them and declaring themselves to be citizens of Israel. This is why both are correct, Hyksos are not Israel they were there first, and Hyksos are Israel, they were saved by Israel by leaving with them. Thus it is not a matter of procreating your own church but includes pride in conversion of others. Further, those who migrated out at the time of slavery at the birth of Aaron /Moses are not massive enough to be regarded as the Hyksos expulsion and yet indeed they left long ago before Israel. The record states they left in the 518th year (being 517 years from Peleg's death when they entered until the Exodus 2030-1513 BC). This is dated by Greece /Rome as Toth 1 on Sep 6 of 1514 BC because they presume the Epagum days were not moved and did begin on September 1. Instead the days were in March before Pamenoth, omitted March 4 in 1513 BC (but not by Persia) and placed on August 31. (Persia's epagum falls on Sep 5 five days later because they did not omit March 4, and so this secondary civil calendar shifted 5 days from Egypt sets on a shelf until Artaxerxes enforces it in 474 BC and Zoroaster in 388 BC (though moving the five epagum days from Thoth to Koyak; reiterated as moving the five Gatha days from Deh to Furvurdeen).

Your understanding of the Hyksos will be greatly improved if you examine Balaam's prophecy regarding Agag.  Why would Agag (Amalek) be spoken of as the greatest power in the region?  The reason is that while Israel was leaving Egypt (the recently greatest power), they encountered Amalek on the way into Egypt, resulting in the famous skirmish in Exodus.  Amalek would go on into Egypt to fill the power vacuum left in the wake of the shattering plagues and the obliteration of Egyptian military power in the Yam Suf debacle.  With Amalek controlliing the resources of Egypt, they become the regional superpower.

Thus Amalek are the alien Kings of Egypt, whose power will not be broken until Saul and David's campaigns against them at the command of Samuel, after which they are weakend enough to allow the Egyptians to finally kick them out.

The reason that the wider world does not know that Amalek=Hyksos, is because of the prophecy that God would erase the memory of Amalek from history.

Wow, I appreciate the info and since I never heard of this before, I will believe it as fact until further corrected by someone else. May I add then that Hyksos is a generic term for invaders or foreignors or unwanted intrusion. I do not think it is conquest not take over, just intrusion.

Again I repeat that with Giza as the foundation of Egypt in 2170 BC 200 years after the Flood, that the first Hyksos are both Hitite and Chaldean at Peleg's death. The evidence is todays scholars say Hitites and Genesis indicates Chaldeans from Ur. The merge is logical because Gilagamesh himself is from the Chaldean river valley and he heads to the Hitites in Ararat before being told to cross the sea to widower  Noah's new island home. This alone defines a migration that goes from Sumer to Ararat and then to Canaan and onward be it Cyprus or Salem or Egypt.
     Figures to verify this are Egyptian Septuagint counting 768 years from end of Flood 3089 BC to Peleg's death in 2321 BC, contrasted to true chronology and we have slavery at Aaron's birth 768 years after the Flood 2370 BC in 1601-1600 BC labeled by the Greek Septuagint as Adams year 3600 and as fall of 300-year Babylon (presumed as 1900-1600 BC, the true figures are 1894-1594 BC as the birth of Moses, and the 8-year cycle Venus tablets end in 1626-1625 BC as year 2400 AM not 1602-1601 BC as year 3600 AM). The point ibeing a record of Hyksos migration in the year of slavery is being affiliated with Peleg's death year by ignoring that the one of Peleg was into Egypt and the one of slavery was out of Egypt. It is the old argument of you didnt ditch us, we threw you out. And you didnt come to us with gifts to join us but rather you intruded.
     Thus Hyksos intruding into Egypt in 2030 BC (Peleg died), out of Egypt in 1601 BC, Moses flees 1554 BC and regarded as expelled confused with Moses and Israel and Hyksos leaving in 1513 BC. Now we have your Hyksos intruding into fallen Egypt, and I feel my eyes opened to beleive you in awe. Yes, I can see where that would be and all you said could be, and I would want to know more. This would lead to confusion of some seeing Hyksos before Israel and others seeing Hyksos after Israel and indeed confuse 1513 BC and 1313 BC as 200 years Hyksos with the whole world divided in who came first, who left first, who was before who and who left after who. Another case of saying you're all right, and yet all merged and mixed it is also saying you're all wrong. I hope I did my part of asisting here. But of course you do not beleive Ramses eccorted Amelek out because you do say it was at the word of Samuel to do so, who lived 98 years (1177-1079 BC), being 4 when Jepthah won battle in 1173 BC, and being 5 when given to the priests and then hearing the voice of Jehovah thru the tent wall (Jepthah's daughter narking on Eli's sons) in 1172 BC, at 60 anointing Saul as king in 1117 BC (year confirmed by Eusebius, also year of kingship confirmed by Josephus though he says it was David 40 then Solomon ruling 80), anoints David to be king but dies in 1079 BC when he is 98 and David is 28 two years before becoming king in 1077 BC. Thus obviously any Hyksos in Egypt cleared out by Samuel's word occurs 173 years (1290-1117 BC) after Ramses.
I am curious as to the manner of this. And where and how was there success during these 38 years of Saul from 1117-1079 BC of handling Agag Amelek in regards Egypt. You have my attention. Fill me in.

Wow, I appreicate the info and since I never heard of this before, I will believe it as fact until further corrected by someone else. May I add then that Hyksos is a generic term for invaders or foreignors or unwanted intrusion. I do not think it is conquest not take over, just intrusion.

Again I repeat that with Giza as the foundation of Egypt in 2170 BC 200 years after the Flood, that the first Hyksos are both Hitite and Chaldean at Peleg's death. The evidence is todays scholars say Hitites and Genesis indicates Chaldeans from Ur. The merge is logical because Gilagamesh himself is from the Chaldean river valley and he heads to the Hitites in Ararat before being told to cross the sea to widower  Noah's new island home. This alone defines a migration that goes from Sumer to Ararat and then to Canaan and onward be it Cyprus or Salem or Egypt.
     Figures to verify this are Egyptian Septuagint counting 768 years from end of Flood 3089 BC to Peleg's death in 2321 BC, contrasted to true chronology and we have slavery at Aaron's birth 768 years after the Flood 2370 BC in 1601-1600 BC labeled by the Greek Septuagint as Adams year 3600 and as fall of 300-year Babylon (presumed as 1900-1600 BC, the true figures are 1894-1594 BC as the birth of Moses, and the 8-year cycle Venus tablets end in 1626-1625 BC as year 2400 AM not 1602-1601 BC as year 3600 AM). The point ibeing a record of Hyksos migration in the year of slavery is being affiliated with Peleg's death year by ignoring that the one of Peleg was into Egypt and the one of slavery was out of Egypt. It is the old argument of you didnt ditch us, we threw you out. And you didnt come to us with gifts to join us but rather you intruded.
     Thus Hyksos intruding into Egypt in 2030 BC (Peleg died), out of Egypt in 1601 BC, Moses flees 1554 BC and regarded as expelled confused with Moses and Israel and Hyksos leaving in 1513 BC. Now we have your Hyksos intruding into fallen Egypt, and I feel my eyes opened to beleive you in awe. Yes, I can see where that would be and all you said could be, and I would want to know more. This would lead to confusion of some seeing Hyksos before Israel and others seeing Hyksos after Israel and indeed confuse 1513 BC and 1313 BC as 200 years Hyksos with the whole world divided in who came first, who left first, who was before who and who left after who. Another case of saying you're all right, and yet all merged and mixed it is also saying you're all wrong. I hope I did my part of asisting here. But of course you do not beleive Ramses eccorted Amelek out because you do say it was at the word of Samuel to do so, who lived 98 years (1177-1079 BC), being 4 when Jepthah won battle in 1173 BC, and being 5 when given to the priests and then hearing the voice of Jehovah thru the tent wall (Jepthah's daughter narking on Eli's sons) in 1172 BC, at 60 anointing Saul as king in 1117 BC (year confirmed by Eusebius, also year of kingship confirmed by Josephus though he says it was David 40 then Solomon ruling 80), anoints David to be king but dies in 1079 BC when he is 98 and David is 28 two years before becoming king in 1077 BC. Thus obviously any Hyksos in Egypt cleared out by Samuel's word occurs 173 years (1290-1117 BC) after Ramses.
I am curious as to the manner of this. And where and how was there success during these 38 years of Saul from 1117-1079 BC of handling Agag Amelek in regards Egypt. You have my attention. Fill me in.

Well, I'm just going by the Bible here.  One must explain why Agag is used as the measure of power in Numbers 24:7.  The explanation is that Amalek now rules the resources of Egypt.  They have filled the superpower vacuum there.

As to Ramases, there is strong evidence that it was he who sacked Jerusalem during the reign of Rehoboam.  Shalem is on his list of great cities subjugated on his campaign into palestine.  No other Pharoah claims to have sacked Shalem, EVER.  Shishak may be a Hebrew pun on Ramases' hypocoristicon, SS (sisa), which is rendered in Hebrew SHSH (SHISHA).  The hard suffix makes the word mean something in Hebrew, one of which is "crusher".

There are several Egyptologists who support this opinion, which of course, undermines the conventional understanding of Egyptian chronology.  Ramases is displaced several hundred years forward in time.  We should not wonder that this should be so, since to believe the conventional chronology would put Pharoahs in Egypt before the flood.

It is pretty certain that Shishak is NOT Shoshenq, and that the identification as such, apart from the similar sound of the name, is completely arbitrary.

I disagree, Shishak is Sheshonq and ruled about 54 years earlier than secular claims; secular only accepts the astronomy they choose to and not all the myths which describe astronomy. It is so easy for them to say oh this is not astronomy, it is just story of mythical pagan gods to worship. The Division is 997 BC, the Tamuz confirms it as July 10. It is clear we live in the decade of the new Babel all confused and free for all. Where there is no unity there is now two sides the good and evil but rather a pool of each one being a liar with his own truth. I can see where Jesus said make up your minds as hot or cold, for or against, because I'll spit you out as luke warm. It is easier to correct and convert a wrong man than an undecided man. I do not advocate self-chronology. My chronology is not my chronology it is based on previous skeletal structures 100s and 1000s of years old.

I disagree, Shishak is Sheshonq and ruled about 54 years earlier than secular claims; secular only accepts the astronomy they choose to and not all the myths which describe astronomy....The Division is 997 BC, the Tamuz confirms it as July 10.

Papyrus Leiden I.350, which dates to the 52nd year of Ramesses II, records lunar observations that seem to support that year of Ramesses' reign in one of 1278, 1253, 1228 or 1203 BC. But, having questioned the value of the Ebers Papyrus, David Rohl argues that since these lunar observations are accurate every twenty-five years, they could also indicate dates 300 years later.

Shoshenq records no campaigns in the hill country of Judea.  Instead, he bypasses them and conquers along the coast and into the northern kingdom.  If Shoshenq had sacked the most famous capital of them all, Solomon's Jerusalem, he would have recorded this.  Instead, Ramases II records this in two places, one listed as Shalem, the other without comment (because it needed none, it was so spectacular), carved in gigantic detail as the crowning achievement of his campaign.

It turns out that many of the kings and dynasties are ruling concurrently (upper and lower Egypt), and not consecutively as Manetho claimed.  This is only now being proven to be true, particularly with the impossible physical juxtaposition of the tombs of Osorkon I and Psusennes I at Tanis.  There is simply no getting around the fact that this physical evidence scientifically falsifies a significant portion of accepted Egyptian chronology.  The result "drags" everyone before them (including Ramases) forward in time.  There simply is no escape from this conclusion.

They are not accurate every 25 years. For example, the new moon which started the calendar according to Genesis on 2030 BC July 12 when Sothis appears in Thebes will not remain there. [This date is epagum 1 according to Genesis and 5 days before Pamenot 1 on July 17, however Pamenot is not accepted by scholars as having shifted 5 days and so the date July 12 that year is calculated as Pamenot 1 instead of Epagum 1; so too the eclipse 6 months later on Jan 6 of 2029 BC is Mesor 24 seven days before Toth 1, but with secular scholars of the belief that Thoth 1 on Jan 13 was always new year will then insert the epagum days there instead so that Jan 6 is Mesor 29.] It matters not which moon you use 2030 BC July 12 or 2029 BC Jan 6; we can for sake of avoiding arguing with schools, they can call these dates Pamenot 1 and Mesor 29 (instead of Genesis Epagum 1 and Mesor 24). Now count 300 years (12x 25 years x 365 days = 12x 309m or 3708 lunar months) to
1730 BC Pamenot 1 =Apr 28
Mesor 29= Oct 23 (absent new moon =Oct 22)
and again to 1430 BC Pamenot 1 =Feb 12 (nm=Feb11)
Mesore 29 = Aug 9 (absent new moon =Aug 8 )
and again to 1131 BC Pamenot 1 =Nov 29 (nm=Nov 28)
Mesor 29 =1130 BC May 26 (absent new moon is May 24)

AS IS THE CASE with any lunar date, as they drift from the artificial calendar then the scholar can say oh it was the last crescent, nope it was the absent moon, no they went by 1st crescent or 2nd cresent. Yes cultures do have a tendency to keep calendar and let the astral sun or moon or planet drift and thus create a new definition; but the scholar of the current present or of the future isn't the divine seer who knows the true drift or whether changes were made or not. JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THAT NONE OF THESE CALENDARS HOLD TRUE to real astronomy, and I am taking the side of truth or astronomy that has gotten our men on the moon or satellites to Saturn and stationary orbits for cell phones. (This is not to say that records of the past cannot correct some error of modern astronomy, obvious if we did have an effect by Noah and Moses and Joshua and Hezekiah etc.)
BUT OF COURSE YOU FEEL I AM IN MY OWN  REALM OF ASTRONOMY IF I DONT GO DIRECTLY INTO THIS TOPIC OF RAMSES and so let's Google it. And after dozens of mismatches and irrelevent magic texts and dozens of claims without listing these lunar dates, I find it . . .

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=177754;article=8977;title=The%20Ancient%20Near%20Eastern%20Chronology%20Forum

So now 51 years (to 52nd year)
for the date II prt 27 (this date is Mekir 27)
and with my astronomy program I verify the dates below
as all being Mekir 27.

Example of 8 dates that could be year 52.
(My pref is 51 years from year 1 -52 is 1290-1239 BC). The author of this link thinks 1239 BC must be ruled out for 1228 BC but I recall astral encounter in Hezekiah's year that can account for the 10 minutes that the author feels prevents the qualification of year 1239 BC.)

1313 BC Jan 10   or 1302 BC Jan  7
1288 BC Jan 3     or 1278 BC Dec 31
1264 BC Dec 28   or 1253 BC Dec 25
1239 BC Dec 22   or 1228 BC Dec 19.

Now I would like to point out that tradition and Septuagint indicate that 1290-1239 BC is the better match to Genesis chronology (creating the Papyrus Canon as year 1800 from Flood of 3090 BC). However, here it claims that the moon creates a problem of 10 minutes which makes the span of 1279-1228 BC. But might I say 8 years after Samaria was destroyed in 740 BC in Hezekiah's year 6, that in Hezekiah's year 14 the sun went back 10 minutes in the summer of 732 BC from a comet taking up stationary orbit for one day and its cyanide killing the 185,000 Assyrians. Due to the sun backing up 10 minutes it would have risen in 1239 BC, 20 minutes before the moon instead of 10 minutes. I realize if the Earth backs up not in rotation but in visual apparent rotation that the moon will apear to back up too, (debatable since we have the object that causes it as changing the focal point of two objects Earth & moon into a temporary focal point of three objects and this object is in stationary orbit of Earth but on what side during the effect, is it between moon & Earth or opposite the moon, and is it the sun that is backing up or just shadows because the light is actually from the comet instead. A bright fly-by can be brighter than the sun and move shadows back without changing astronomy by 10 minutes.)

I recall recently reading somewhere of a record that states the sun rose and then backed up to rise a second time. If such a record exists then to fit scientifically with Hezekiah's noon sun then the event a such a sunrise would have to occur west of Jerusalem such as England or Spain where sunrise occurs during late morning of Jerusalem.

They are not accurate every 25 years.

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=177754;article=8977;title=The%20Ancient%20Near%20Eastern%20Chronology%20Forum

So now 51 years (to 52nd year)
for the date II prt 27 (this date is Mekir 27)
and with my astronomy program I verify the dates below
as all being Mekir 27.

1313 BC Jan 10   or 1302 BC Jan  7
1288 BC Jan 3     or 1278 BC Dec 31
1264 BC Dec 28   or 1253 BC Dec 25
1239 BC Dec 22   or 1228 BC Dec 19.

But the critical question is this, could those same observations from the Ebers papyrus have been made some three centuries later as David Rohl suggests?  If so, then those data points cannot of themselves prevent Ramases II from being Shishak.

As I stated before, you have the issues of whether a date is true to the moon. The Hebrew calendar now uses rules that forbid certain months to fall on certain days of the week. Or forbids to have only 28 days or to have as much as 31 days as the real moon does. Because of this, it is a lie to say a Hebrew calendar new moon always falls on the actual crescent. It is a calendar, man-made with rules and not the moon. The same applies to Egypt, you can say the 1st of the month is last crescent, or you can say it is absent moon, or you can say it is first crescent. What ever you claim to intepret it as is debateable since those people are dead. Further, people can claim anything, they claim Dec 25 is the winter solstice, it's not. And if it has been it was in 280 BC when Gregorian dates were Dec 21. So too, the norm is for people to hold to a calendar even though  the actual astronomy is drifting from it. Do not forget that the official equinox of 1582 AD was actually already 10 days past the real equinox (ignoring it for 1200 years). What is observed as a last dying moon soon after centuries moves 2 days so that it is a first crescent. This means that unless you have a picture heiroglyph of the actual moon next to the date it clams to be, then how do you know what the word NEW means... does it mean absent or does it mean 1st crescent and is 1st crescent one day or two days from conjunction. As long as the definition can be questioned, then so too it can be placed anywhere in the drift. To lock all chronology on one mere year is foolish. Even this I will say that the WatchTower has only lucked out by counting 537 BC back (70+390+36+480+430+427) to 2370 BC as Flood; they dont even care that 100 astral dates set fixed during that span to prove it all. And yet so is everyone else fixing everything to a single year or astral date or perhaps a span,
and then merging it with another span fixed to another astral date 100s of years before that too, like puzzle pieces fixed with glue to the backing (and the edges cut) to fit other pieces also fixed to backing by glue (to make the edges meet). My point is not trying to say therefore there is no truth, or its your truth or a toss up; rather a consistant concern for all Earth and all worlds and all gradual evolution of calendars and evolution of language proves the timeline to be revealed by seeing all of us from one family Noah. The fact we all disagree is suppose to be realized that we as Noah's family disagree as much as Cain and Abel did. You can resolve it Abel's way or Cain's way.
I stand with Ramses 1290 BC and Division 997 BC and thus Shishak in 993 BC and thus 297 years after Ramses began. The Egyptian Septuagint confirms 1290 BC as year 1800 of a Flood 3090 BC (340+ sothic 1460, and 600+ venus 1200)mistaken 720 years /180 leap days before true Flood 2370 BC. And the Papyrus (1290 BC) and the NeoBabylon Era 747 BC (sothic 740+1460) both confirm the false belief exited from 1290-747 BC that THOTH 1 new year was 2770 BC July 17 as the calendar;
(not the modern 2774 BC July 18, nor traditional 2782 BC July 20 for our past 2000 years at which time now the internet is proving the rebellious sweep of Satan to go back to the disproven 2782 BC to laugh at how the schools and nations go back to trash vomited out so they can make it the new school curriculum again. Satan is laughing and this isn't funny that a spirit striving and driven to push this old cr*p exists and is succeeding.... consuming Wikipedia too. I have tried to asist the fight against it and it is as the Bible says like a Flood slamming its way thru and knocking all truth over.)

I stand with Ramses 1290 BC and Division 997 BC and thus Shishak in 993 BC and thus 297 years after Ramses began. The Egyptian Septuagint confirms 1290 BC as year 1800 of a Flood 3090 BC (340+ sothic 1460, and 600+ venus 1200)mistaken 720 years /180 leap days before true Flood 2370 BC. And the Papyrus (1290 BC) and the NeoBabylon Era 747 BC (sothic 740+1460) both confirm the false belief exited from 1290-747 BC that THOTH 1 new year was 2770 BC July 17 as the calendar;

But 1290 puts Ramases' conquest of Shalem (Salem) smack in the middle of the Judges.  A bit strange there is no mention of the mightiest Pharoah of them all tramping through the Judean hill country laying seige to Jebus/Salem, not to mention the other cities in Israel he destroyed.  Why would there be not a peep from the judges about this massive irruption into the land of Canaan?

Is this claim of Ramses something new? I havent heard of it. Of course we always have those who will look at another nation as they look at the BIble and say these people just lied thru their teeth grinning.

After Googling the topic and reading I am of the opinion this Pharaoh is full of it. He is raising up the New Kingdom (sothic 1310 BC as Thoth 1 on July 17 in the claims that the Hyksos did not create the calendar on Pamenot 1 2030 BC July 17) since what you say is the New Kingdom of Exodus (1513 BC sothic 720 years from Ur 2233 BC and Flood) was powerless and was taken by Hyksos Amelek. It could be Ramses simply rose up in Egypt and eliminated those he felt were Semetics and Israelis in Egypt from 1513-1290 BC. As far as Israel exodus is concerned, anyone left behind in Egypt is no longer Israel, and remain as foreign intruders. This is because from conquest by Joshua starting 1473 BC to Assyria taking Samaria in 740 BC there is no destruction of Israel ever at all. Think a moment, how can this king claim any conquest ever at all prior to the Assyrian success at it. According to Judges, the land had no disturbance from anyone during the New Kingdom (whether 1314 BC or 1310 or 1290) until 1286 BC when Midian attacked for 7 years which then Gideon stopped it for 40 years until Abimelech attacked in 1239 BC the 52nd year of Ramses. Perhaps it was Ramses who negotiated this take over by Abimeleck for 3 years until 1236 BC.

As for previous remark in this thread of Hamurabi elevating Marduk, let me correct that by refining it. Marduk is a calendar matching the 360-day year and (as 780 days for 6 orbits every 13 years) it is thus the Leader of the calendar new year, and so is called Damuzi the Leader. As such it meets at the four points of equinox and solstice every 52 years (x360 days); an advance of 92 days such as Ninevah's April 2060 BC to Marduk Street's July 2009 BC.

This artificial count was our divine future in the fact it would fall on the new year of year 6000 (our Gregorian May 17 of 1913 AD). However, any change in Earth's spin from 360 days to 365 days is not changing other planets. These people were smarter than today's scholars who come up with stupid ideas that Venus and Mars went out of orbit to hit Earth. These people know that the astral impact of the Flood means that asteroids are out of orbit and not our Venus or Mars. When Venus and Mars are absent, they did not come down from heaven as big rocks to strike us, nor are they visiting in human form on earth. But since Venus and Mars can be counted by days it allows a means of marking dates of asteroids and comets that they could see until close encounters. In other words if we use eclipses to better determine astral movement not just of the moon but all laws of motion in space, it doesnt mean we beleive the moon is destroying the sun each time. So too, alignments of Venus and Mars do not bring asteroids, nor is it these planets that hit Earth, but the asteroids did and the calendars of Sothis, and Venus, and Mars are merely being used to calculate time before we do get hit by an asteroid. Thus these people mark the meeting of Mars and Venus (about every 2 years) but only the significant ones in the direction of the specific zodiac constellation, and season of year. When doing so, we then have these modern men who say Mars and Venus left orbit to hit Earth. You tell me who is smarter, Hamurabi or Velchovski, because here is what Hamurabi did. If 156 years of 360 days is 3x 52 year Mars, 12x 13 year Mars, 72 orbits of 780 day Mars; then add one orbit of 780 day Mars and these 73 orbits of 780 day Mars is 156x 365 days. With the Egyptian calendar created in 2030 BC the egyptian dates did exist to prove this 156 years from 1926-1770 BC...
= 7th month Toth 1, Dec 18 of 1926 BC
as 127 days after Aug 13 Tamuz on Pakon 24
to 7th month Toth 1, Nov 9 of 1770 BC
as 122 days after July 10 Tamuz on Pakon 29.
Interesting factor here is that after the Exodus when epagum days were moved from Pamenot to Toth as new year, then the Julian Aug 13 date in 1926 BC becomes reckoned as Pakon 29 inducing false support of an unaltered calendar.

Hamurabi's faith is thus if the rise of Mars in 1913 AD as year 6000 does not bring an asteroid hit in 1914 AD, it will prove that God did not determine year 6000 in the 360-day calendar but rather the 365-day calendar which extends 59.5 years beyond it (4344x 360 days versus 4344x 365 days) and if Sothic (Julian) then even another 1086 days (3 years) beyond that too. Thus Hamurabi created in year 1770 BC his 23rd year a calendar of 3744 years of 365 days. Today this calendar is found to have been restructured by the Maya in 1314 BC to count from 3114 BC as the Flood and end in 630 AD for a christ king. The true count of the new Marduk uses the 7th month Toth as the Marduk new year (1770 BC Nov 9) following a July 10 Tamuz (sun crossing over Mars) and so ends the original true Hamurabi Toth Marduk new year on 1973 AD April 30 following a Tamuz of 1972 AD Sep 9 (sun crossing over Mars).

1913 AD May 4 (Greg. May 17) original Marduk new year
              of 360 day calendar for year 6000
1973 AD April 17 (Greg.Apr 30) =Toth 1 Marduk New Year
              of 365 day calendar for year 6000
  936 leap days of 3744 years
1975 AD Nov 9 (Greg. Nov 22) Julian year 6000 based on
              Julian Nov 9 date of Toth 1 of year 2256 in 1770 BC

=======
FALSE CLAIM OF 3600-YEAR MARDUK
The confusion of 3600 years is not some planet Marduk that orbits 3600 years, but rather it is Venus.
3x 1200 egyptian year Venus is 3600 egyptian years
1200 egyptian years = 1199 Julian 65 days but
Venus position drifts 60 days and so is 1199 Julian 5 days
times three cycles makes the 3600 year Venus calendar as
3597 years and 15 days.
However, refining Venus to 243 Julian years created a rotation of the Venus pentacle as 1215 Julian years which translates in the 8 year cycle as 1216 egyptian years.
Thus three cycles as 3597 Julian years (3600 egyptian)
could be debated as 3645 Julian years (3648 egyptian).
It is interesting here that the 3600 years from the death of king Amizaduga measuring this Venus in 1625 BC to a future 3600 years as year 2400 to year 6000 (in 1972 AD)
can be confused with this 3648 calendar years if trying to link it to king Shulgi measuring Venus for 48 years from 1991-1943 BC.

How does Venus and Marduk get confused. It is because Hamurabi's calendar merged with Egypt's to form an alignment between 780-day Mars and 584-day Venus. Every 312x 365 days and 936x 365 days where 12x 312 years is 3744 and 4x 936 years is 3744. The problem is that Venus is shy 2 days every 40 years as Moses noted. This adds up to 187 days out of phase with Mars in 3744 years. The 3600-year calendar by Amizaduga corrects this but as a whole new calendar. In the 1200-year calendar you must subtract 60 days (2 days per 40 years). The confusion occurs because he does this in 1625 BC when it is year 2400 and 3600 years more to year 6000. But the knowledge had been obtained in 1770 BC
Adams year 2256 is Noahs year 1200)
with 600 years after the Flood proving Venus had rotated a full 1200 years in this year 1200 of Noah. But the 3744-year calendar does not utilize this atonement of days for Venus because then (if correcting Venus) it wouldnt have days to honor the meeting of the two calendars Venus and Mars... DO NOT CONCLUDE THIS MEANS THE REAL VENUS AND MARS MEET IN THE SKY ON THESE ARTIFICAL DATE AVERAGES. So the formula for a 1200 year Venus was created on July 10 of 1770 BC based on Jan 6 of 2369 BC, knowing that Venus made full circle in 1200 years but that only the 600 years after the Flood could create a day formula because the Earth had changed from the asteroid Flood impact.

Anyone who researches and studies and investigates and learns can see things (perhaps things that are not true), but the study must be done (nothing ventured nothing gained); and I understand the process of people condemning the ones they see as wrong if they also see a path of bad results coming from it. I can only hope you see what I do, that this math and astronomy was their glory in that it marked our generation to look for an asteroid as if divinely warned for us well ahead of time.

My only possible revision is truly a joke because it notes that the movie 2012 drowning the Earth is released Nov 13 which is (40+7) days after Yom Kippur which says hmm is this sacrifice of church followed by 40 days to asteroid and 7 days to continental plunge in baptism of the wicked. The movie China Syndrome with Mike Douglas and Jane Fonda was released and in that week 7 mile island exploded its radiation. Do spirits of Satan and God cause these? Did God's spirit direct the movie to align with Satan's negligence that released at 7 mile island? If so, then what happens if we see the sacrifice Sep 27 Yom Kippur, get hit by an asteroid 40 days later, and then what, sit in a movie theatre waiting for the LIVE EFFECTS God provides ?  LOL
ah sheesh
You won't hear much more from me, because between my own financial disasters and the fact that this year as the 32nd of Artaxerxes does close on Rosh Hashana Sep 18 ending the 104 years of restoring Jerusalem (I have no prophecy beyond this year). Yes I agree I said no concept after Passover 2009, but i forgot the year does run 2008-2009 Tishri, and i assumed sacrifice first means 2008 Tishri (as I had said 1996 Tishri), and where upon Passover 1997 failed, I presumed it would also be all vain after Passover 2009. When I went to Mount Ararat on March 7, would I or could I have caused a prePassover incident worldwide for April 9. Would it have resulted in the death of the church on Passover? What about my having gone now again, yet I returned without attempt. Yeh I know I know you feel this extension from Passover to Yom Kippur is just to torture you more.