��Ӱֱ��

Valuable to any student of the Bible is an understanding of the geographical and political entities that engaged with ancient Israel. In the previous chapter, George Pierce provided insight into the immediate surroundings of ancient Canaan during the time of the patriarchs and matriarchs. In this chapter, Kerry Muhlestein follows a similar approach but focuses instead on Israel’s arguably most important neighbor during the time period we are discussing: Egypt. Delving into the social and cultural world of Egypt and this superpower’s influence throughout the known world, this chapter sheds light on the difficulties the ancient Israelites might have encountered and the unique challenges they experienced while engaging with their neighbors to the southwest. —DB and AS

In our attempts to better understand the stories of the Bible, we must come to more fully understand the world of the Bible. An important element of life for biblical characters was the way their culture interacted with the peoples and cultures around them. Egyptian culture was one of the most influential cultures in the era of the Old Testament, especially in the early parts of it. The military and political clout that sprang from the Nile Valley—and the prestige that accompanied the Egyptian culture and its achievements—played a larger role in biblical stories than we often realize. If we truly desire to understand the world of the Bible, then we have to explore the interactions that the people of the Bible had with their powerful southwestern neighbor. As we detail some of these interactions, we can more fully picture familiar biblical stories. As a result, these oft-read stories should then become fuller and more vibrant and, in a way, can then become a new story.

Egypt’s relations with the land and peoples of Canaan varied a great deal between the life of Abraham and the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. During this span we see a continuum of contact that ranges from minor associations between these areas to complete domination of them by Egypt. While we do not know as much about these relations as we would like, analyzing them can help to explain how Egypt and Canaan affected biblical characters and events.

Placing Biblical Events Historically

To explore these interactions, we must first determine which eras of Egyptian history we should consider. Determining a date for the patriarchs and matriarchs is a difficult task. The lack of biblical uniformity in dating schemes, as well as a comparable paucity of biblical information about the world around Abraham and Sarah—which could be synchronized with established chronologies—makes the task of dating the lives of Abraham and Sarah somewhat speculative. For the purposes of this chapter, we will use the dating scheme proposed by John M. Lundquist in the Studies in Scripture series.[1] Lundquist posits that Abraham was born in about 1943 BC, which would place his long adult life right in the middle of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. While it may seem that the Middle Kingdom’s more than two hundred years of existence provides only a very rough date range, we must also remember that Abraham himself lived for almost two hundred years, most of which must have overlapped with Egypt’s Twelfth Dynasty (ca. 1950–1750 BC). John Gee has looked further into Egyptian evidence and compared it with the story of the Book of Abraham in order to further refine the date and has confirmed that the Twelfth Dynasty is the era we should be looking at.[2] Accordingly, we turn to the time of the Middle Kingdom to examine the zeitgeist (a German term scholars use to describe the unique spirit, circumstances, or climate of the time) of Egypt’s relations with its northern neighbors during Abraham’s life.

Dating the Israelite conquest of Canaan hinges on the date of the Exodus. There are many theories as to when the Exodus occurred, but we cannot ascertain with any certainty which pharaoh interacted with Moses. We can be sure that it had at least happened by the reign of Merneptah, the son of Ramses the Great, because Merneptah, in the first extrabiblical attestation of Israel,[3] mentions battle with Israelites in the land of Canaan early in his reign.[4] Thus the conquest should have happened before 1200 BC, toward the end of the New Kingdom of Egypt.[5] As a result, we will explore the relations between Egypt and Canaan from 2000 BC until 1200 BC, spanning from Egypt’s Middle Kingdom to nearly the end of the New Kingdom.

Egypt in Canaan under Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob

Opinions about the extent of Egypt’s interrelationship with Canaan and the surrounding area during the Middle Kingdom have shifted substantially over the past fifty years. As we continue to garner more evidence, our understanding becomes more and more nuanced. Currently it seems that while there was no Egyptian empire in Canaan during the lives of Abraham, Sarah, Rebekah, Isaac, Rachel, and Jacob, there was an organic, healthy, and lively exchange between the two areas,[6] though the amount of contact Egypt had with Canaan, especially southern Canaan, is much smaller than Egypt had with Canaan’s northern neighbors in modern Lebanon and Syria.[7] Even in the Southern Levant during this period, there were various times and sometimes specific places where and when Egypt demonstrated a strong dominance.[8]

There were undoubtedly cities, such as Megiddo, where Egypt maintained some kind of trading presence that included officials residing in Syria and Canaan for a lengthy period.[9] Egyptian representatives obtained Canaanite levies that included cattle, wine, vessels, oil, metals, food, weapons, semiprecious stones, and people.[10] This was true of areas north and east of Canaan as well,[11] especially Byblos,[12] and to a lesser degree areas such as Ebla.[13] Trade relations are witnessed by the presence of Syro-Canaanite goods in Egypt, such as cedar, which is attested both textually and archaeologically.[14] We cannot always tell which of these goods came to Egypt via economic trade as opposed to arriving through coerced levies, but certainly both took place.

The fact that the ancient Egyptians felt like they had obtained some kind of hegemony over many parts of Canaan is illustrated by two groups of texts from this time period[15] that were designed to keep down rebellion, or even magically cut off rebellious thinking, in Canaanite cities such as Jerusalem, Ashkelon, Rehob, Akko, Mishal, Achshaf, Valley of Akko, Iyon, Laish, Hazor, Qedesh, and Shechem.[16] Certainly Egypt maintained at least some kind of influence or even dominance in these places if the ancient Egyptians felt that there was potential for rebellion against them in such places. This idea is augmented in a number of ways, especially since there are several texts that describe fighting against the people of Canaan and its neighbors[17] and texts that inform us that Egyptian kings such as Mentuhotep II,[18] Senusret I,[19] Amenemhat II,[20] and Senusret III[21] all made military expeditions in the area, spanning from about 2000–1800 BC. It is quite possible that kings before and after this did the same and that we are merely missing the records made of it.

With these records, we can develop a picture of Egypt’s relations with Canaan during this area. Due to their relative strategic unimportance, large parts of Canaan would have remained outside the attention of Egypt. Yet key sites along crucial trade routes were frequently the target of Egyptian control. Egypt seems to have developed a strategically selective plan of interaction and control that allowed it to gain the most from the Levant’s resources while investing the smallest necessary amount of Egypt’s own resources. Egypt seems to have exerted influence in some areas via trade and diplomatic methods, but in other areas Egypt used military occupancy and raids to exert influence. The form of contact with Egypt was not even nor homogenous but rather reflected whatever would best serve Egypt’s interests; thus these forms of contact would vary by place and time.

Life with the Egyptians for the Patriarchs and Matriarchs in Canaan

So what did this Egyptian presence in Canaan look like for someone like Abraham, Sarah, Rachel or Jacob? Because the text does not specifically address this, we are left with informed and well-thought-out guesswork as our only avenue of investigation. Yet we are derelict in our research duties if we do not at least consider how contact with Egypt would have affected the life of the great biblical patriarchs and matriarchs, for it surely did. We have enough information available to us that even though we cannot point to specific textual examples, we can still better understand the scriptural setting if we address the questions that Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob, Rachel, and Leah would have asked about life in an area that was so near to Egypt. Let us begin by looking at how Abraham’s early life may have been influenced by Egypt.

The influence of Egyptian religion, and probably Egyptian political influence, is spoken of in Abraham’s account of his near sacrifice by a priest of Pharaoh (Abraham 1:6–13). Abraham was probably particularly sensitive about the seductiveness of Egyptian religion, having seen his father and relatives, heavily influenced by Egypt, turn to idolatry (Abraham 1:5–7, 16–17). This influence was so seductive that even after Abraham’s father repented of his idolatry after Abraham’s miraculous deliverance, Abraham’s father soon returned to it (Abraham 2:5). All of this gave reason for Abraham to try to have his household avoid contact with Egyptian culture, which was so present in the land of his nativity. Further, Pharaoh’s court mourned the destruction that Abraham’s delivering angel wrought upon the Egyptian priest (Abraham 1:20). We do not know if this caused Abraham to, for some time, avoid sites that had an Egyptian presence, but it seems likely.

In fact, one bit of inscriptional evidence creates a possible scenario for understanding Abraham’s journeys. Two inscriptions, from just before Abraham and contemporary to him, attest to an “Ulishem” west of Ebla, somewhat north of coastal Byblos.[22] As was mentioned above, Byblos experienced heavy Egyptian influence, while Ebla felt a lighter amount. Towns that were geographically in between these two cities, such as Ulaza, also found themselves in between them in regard to their amount of contact with Egypt.[23] While most people think of Ur as a city in southern Mesopotamia, the Book of Abraham may cast some more light on this issue.[24] While we cannot tell whether Ur is indeed in southern Mesopotamia, a possible and tentative scenario could arise from comparing the text of the Book of Abraham and some recent archaeological finds. A group of archaeologists have been excavating an area they think may be Ulishem. If this purported site for Ulishem—which is being excavated in Turkey, just west of Ebla—is the “Olishem” of Abraham 1:10, where Abraham was nearly sacrificed,[25] it would be in a place that was experiencing just the kind of influence described in the Book of Abraham. As Abraham sought to flee from such life-threatening semi-Egyptianized culture, it would make sense for him to travel east to Haran, where the Egyptians had little or no presence. Then, as the Egyptian presence in Canaan lessened, a phenomenon demonstrated by John Gee, Abraham would have been freer to move to Canaan. While this itinerary is only speculation, it is an interesting possibility.

After Abraham and Sarah moved to Canaan, they spent most of their time in the southern areas between Hebron and Beersheba. Of the places they stayed, these locations would have experienced the least amount of contact with Egypt because Egypt’s interactions with its northern neighbors were concentrated primarily around those areas with important ports, though Egypt would have maintained some minimal interest in the overland routes that these two sites lay on. Still, the interactions were heavier in the north and west and waned toward the southern and central areas of Canaan and Syria, making Hebron and Beersheba the patriarchal and matriarchal places of abode with the least Egyptian contact.[26] It is interesting that these seem to be the two places where these matriarchs and patriarchs spent the most time.

These founding families spent much of their lives in Canaan in a nomadic lifestyle, moving from place to place as they took their substantial herds to the best grazing areas of the season,[27] and they spent significant amounts of time with their families and flocks in the areas of Beer Sheba, Gerar, and Hebron, as well as frequenting more northern locations such as Shechem. The Egyptian presence was likely greater during Abraham and Sarah’s day than during their children’s or grandchildren’s. While we cannot tell for certain, it seems probable that the patriarchs and matriarchs would have preferred to avoid any contact with Egypt. There may have been some misgivings because of the problems Abraham had experienced with an Egyptian priest earlier in life (Abraham 1:10–20), though such misgivings could have been somewhat overcome during Abraham’s sojourn in Egypt, where Abraham had some positive interactions with the Egyptians. Yet most small groups would want to avoid contact with an entity that occasionally became a large and invading presence that would at times forcibly take people and resources for its own benefit. Thus we can surmise that unless the founding families were looking for a group with whom they could trade large amounts of their herds, the patriarchs probably tried to “fly below the radar” of the Egyptians.

Because the patriarchs and matriarchs did not live in large established cities (see George Pierce’s chapter in this volume), these families were likely able to largely avoid substantial contact with the Egyptians in Canaan. However, these families did have dealings with many of the local leaders who undoubtedly interacted with their powerful southern neighbor, probably often in the form of regular tribute of goods and people sent to the Egyptians. For example, the patriarchs and matriarchs had somewhat regular dealings with the leaders of the Canaanite communities in Beer Sheba, Hebron, and Shechem. These cities lay along minor, yet substantial, trade routes. While it was not the main focus of the Egyptian’s foreign presence in Canaan, it is very probable that the they passed along these routes from time to time—especially Shechem, which was at a juncture between two small trade routes. They would probably have had some interest in maintaining a form of influence or relation with these regions. Some of the Canaanite leaders of these sites may have even been forced into some degree of subservience to or military conflict with the Egyptians.

Exactly how that would have influenced the families of the patriarchs and matriarchs is unknown, though it is likely that the movements of Egyptian troops and the collection of Canaanite tribute affected where Abraham, Sarah and their family stayed and the people with whom they would trade and interact. It is easy to picture Rebekah keeping her children near her in out-of-the-way places when they knew that Egyptian armies were marching through the countryside. We can imagine Jacob worrying about what would happen to his wives or daughters or granddaughters if the family was unexpectedly overtaken by such an army while in the spirit of claiming booty. This is not to suggest that marauding Egyptian armies were an everyday occurrence, but rather that the armies’ presence away from established outposts was rare. At the same time, we know that several Egyptian military expeditions were sent into the land of Canaan during the life of each of the patriarchs and matriarchs. Whether they ever came into contact with Egyptian military expeditions or not, it seems inevitable that Egyptian armies had some impact on the lives of the families of Genesis.

In one circumstance, we know that Abraham was willing to interfere in larger politics in a way that could have raised Egyptian ire. He rescued his nephew Lot from the area of Laish, which would later be named Dan (Genesis 14). The town of Laish straddled a junction of trade routes between Tyre and Damascus and seems to have had regular contact with Egypt.[28] Interfering with such a site could have raised the attention, and perhaps the military action, of Egyptian kings in the midst of attempting to rescue Lot from the site. Yet Abraham was willing to risk this in order to regain the freedom of Lot and his family.

Along these lines, the fairly regular Egyptian trade during much of this period probably also affected Abraham, Sarah, and their descendants as they sought to turn their numerous flocks into a viable family economy. The biblical narrative does not indicate that they themselves mounted expeditions to Egypt except in the most trying of circumstances (such as when Jacob’s sons or Abraham went to Egypt during a famine), but they may have sold their goods to traveling caravans who then sold the goods in Egypt (which is the setting of the Joseph’s story in Egypt). This is the only biblical example we know of with surety of participation in human trafficking: when some of Jacob’s children sold their brother Joseph to others of Abraham’s descendants who were on a trade expedition heading to Egypt (Genesis 37:27–36). Jacob’s children’s familiarity with this kind of a caravan suggests that they were not strangers to the act of selling things to such merchants.

Additionally, the patriarchs and matriarchs may have thought it wise to refrain from affiliating with those whom the Egyptians may have viewed as enemies, lest their families become guilty by association. Yet these founding families would have had to balance this with their need for trading their flocks and with the importance of maintaining good relations with the peoples who lived in the lands they moved through. The economic benefit that could come from seeking out either Egyptians or those with Egyptian connections as the patriarchs and matriarchs participated in an economic world where Egypt was a major player probably created a tension with their desire to avoid entanglements with Egypt, its allies, or its potential enemies. While we do not know exactly how these competing desires affected the families in the Bible, we can be sure that they did.

As noted, there was an ebb and flow to the amount of contact and control that Egypt had with its Semitic neighbors. Some of these changes may have influenced Abraham and Sarah’s movements in the land of Canaan and into Egypt, and to a lesser extent, Isaac’s and Jacob’s and their families’ movements as well. Regardless, we can be sure that during Abraham and Sarah’s tenure in Syria/Turkey, Canaan, and Egypt, those localities experienced a great deal of interaction between the Egyptians and the peoples in the lands where Abraham and Sarah lived. For example, we know of Egyptian officials who brought herds of cattle from Megiddo into Egypt, we know of officials that brought wine and other produce from the area into Egypt, we are aware of cedar coming from Lebanon into Egypt fairly regularly, we know of several officials who record having been on invasions in the region, and we know of several kings who record the same thing.[29] While many of these references are to fairly general areas, some include specifics that overlap with known biblical sites. For example, Sebek-Khu, who lived toward the end of Abraham’s life, records that he mounted a very successful invasion of Shechem,[30] a city whose surrounding regions were sometimes a place where Abraham, Jacob, and Jacob’s sons fed their flocks. Surely Abraham, Sarah, Jacob, Rachel, Leah, Bilhah, Zilpah, and their children would wish to avoid being present when such plunder-oriented activities were taking place. Thus it is likely that Abraham, Sarah, and many of their descendants did an interesting dance around the Egyptian presence in Canaan. As a seminomadic family, however, it would have been easier for them to do so than for their urban neighbors.

Another Egyptian influence that Abraham and his posterity dealt with were the polytheistic religions that typically adopted many of the religious practices and gods of neighboring cultures with whom they come in contact. The Book of Abraham makes it clear that aspects of the Egyptian religion were adopted by other groups, possibly including the local Syro-Canaanites (Abraham 1:6–13). This rings an according note with archaeological evidence that demonstrates religious integration of some of the Egyptian pantheon by the inhabitants of the eastern Mediterranean areas, such as Ugarit and Ebla.[31] Earlier we noted that Abraham in particular may have been wary of the potential of his family’s being seduced by Egyptian religion since he had seen his father and other members of his family turn to the Egyptians’ idolatrous practices in a way that proved to be hard to leave behind (Abraham 1:5–7, 16–17; 2:5). This negative family legacy likely made the patriarchs and matriarchs uneasy about contact with Egyptian culture. As Abraham, Sarah, Jacob, and possibly Isaac and Rebekah struggled to get their families to worship Jehovah only (Genesis 35:2), they almost certainly would have been wary of settlement centers that exhibited a strong Egyptian religious influence (Genesis 31:19; 24:3–6; Abraham 1:6–13 cited above and below). We know the patriarchs and matriarchs also struggled with avoiding Canaanite religious influence, as is attested by Rebekah’s sorrow over Esau marrying a daughter of the local Canaanites (Genesis 26:34–35). Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob, Rachel, and Leah, who spent most of their time in the south-central part of the region where Egyptian influence seems to have been the smallest, probably attempted to avoid areas of heavy Egyptian influence not just because of the physical danger being in the area could effect but also as part of an effort to try to keep their families away from Egyptian religious influence.

Abraham and Sarah in Egypt

When we consider Abraham and Sarah’s trip to Egypt, we must more fully examine the Semitic presence there. Evidence indicates that many Semitic people came to Egypt for a variety of reasons, including Canaanites who came to Egypt to take advantage of the opportunity to trade with this land of plenty.[32] Texts from within Egypt mention a military officer “in charge of the Asiatic troops” and a “scribe of the Asiatics.”[33] From other sources we know of male Semites achieving roles such as craftsmen, butler, or even chancellor.[34] Additionally, Egypt was full of Semites who were enslaved through Egypt’s wars and outposts in Syro-Canaan.[35]

The most important element of Syro-Canaanite influence in Egypt during Abraham and Sarah’s lifetimes was the building up of a largely Semitic city on the northeastern edge of the Nile Delta. Just as Abraham’s and Sarah’s lives were beginning, the city of Avaris experienced a huge influx of people from northeast Syria.[36] These people would eventually become known as the Hyksos. During the middle part of Abraham and Sarah’s lives, this already-large city tripled in size, becoming a thriving port with substantial economic means.[37] The Semitic people there maintained much of their Syrian roots and culture, but they became largely Egyptianized.[38] This unique culture subsequently spread to a number of cities.[39] As this happened, more inhabitants from southern Canaan became part of the Hyksos presence.[40] The Hyksos adopted much of the Egyptian religion, but they also mixed it with their own religious practices and beliefs. It is difficult to tell if such a mix would have been more or less of a concern to Abraham and Sarah than a group of people practicing purely Egyptian religion. Either way, because of their conflict with an Egyptian priest earlier in their lives, Abraham and Sarah would almost certainly have deep misgivings about travel to Egypt. Yet when God commanded, they went. It may be that they took some comfort in knowing that they could at least find a portion of Egypt in which being Semitic was not entirely foreign.

During this geographic and economic boom in Avaris, Egypt’s strong central government started to slowly collapse. Various regional groups in Egypt broke from central leadership and crowned their own leaders as kings of Egypt,[41] though in reality they were only kings of their parts of Egypt. The Hyksos did this as well; thus a group of Egyptianized Semites ruled the eastern part of the Nile Delta as Egyptian kings. Their influence spread, and they came to rule more and more of the country until they eventually controlled all of Egypt by about 1650 BC.

When Abraham and Sarah journeyed to Egypt, as is recorded in both Genesis and the Book of Abraham, the first part of the country they would have encountered was the eastern Nile Delta. It is possible that they came to that area while it was a small kingdom ruled by a Semitic kinglet who stylized himself as an Egyptian king and who proclaimed himself king of Egypt. We cannot tell whether Sarah’s marriage to and Abraham’s interactions with an Egyptian king were with the ruler of a strong, centralized Egypt, or with the very beginnings of the Hyksos kings of Egypt, possibly around 1750 BC. While both are possible, I lean slightly toward the latter.

Joseph in Egypt

Understanding the Hyksos presence may be key to understanding the Joseph in Egypt narrative. Again, we cannot date Joseph precisely, but the most likely setting for Joseph is when the Hyksos began to take control of all of Egypt, in about 1650 BC. We know that a brisk Semitic slave trade was happening in Egypt during the era of the founding families.[42] In some ways, Joseph was just one more of the many enslaved people (Genesis 37:36). However, if he was sold into the household of an Egyptianized Semitic official, it seems all the more likely that Joseph was made the chief steward of the house. Once he was raised to power by the Egyptian king (presumably to the office known as vizier), much of the story works quite well in a Hyksos setting. The Hyksos seem to have gained control of Egypt at least partially, if not largely, through economic means.[43]

The story of Joseph accepting all kinds of payments, including land, from the Egyptians in exchange for grain may very well be an account of how the Hyksos came to power (Genesis 47:13–26). If Joseph were serving under a Semitic king, then the priest of On was likely a relative of that king, making the daughter whom Joseph married (Genesis 41:45) a fellow Semite through whose children the priesthood line and covenant would continue. Many other elements of the Joseph in Egypt story work well if we posit an Egyptian court with many Egyptians that is ultimately controlled by a Semitic group. Such tension between the Semites and Egyptians is evident when Joseph’s brothers dined with the Egyptians (Genesis 47). However, while the setting fits the story, we must be clear that we have no way of proving or disproving this hypothesis.

Moses and the Exodus

Eventually, around 1550 BC, in the southern city of Thebes, the local rulers gained enough power to throw off Hyksos control. Their newly developed ability to replicate chariot technology probably put them on an equal enough footing with the Hyksos to find success in battle. These Theban princes slowly pushed the Hyksos north, gaining the support of other Egyptians as they went, until they not only forced their foreign rulers out of the country but also pursued them into Canaan.[44] The Egyptians absolutely detested having been dominated by foreigners and took steps toward never letting it happen again, including making continual military forays into Canaan,[45] starting a more strict control of and physical presence in Canaan, and building forts along Egypt’s northeastern border to protect it from foreign incursions from Canaan.

The new Theban dynasty, which founded what is known as the “New Kingdom” in Egyptian history, despised any groups related to the Hyksos, especially if there were some notion that they had aided these rulers. Thus the Exodus reference to a pharaoh arising who “knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:9) most likely does not mean that he had never heard of Joseph, but instead means that this pharaoh had no respect for Joseph or anything he did. This phrase may be a way of referring to the expulsion of the Hyksos and the establishment of dominance by Theban rulers over all of Egypt that took place in the mid-sixteenth century BC. The enslavement of the Israelite generations before Moses’s day is not surprising. The fear of another Hyksos invasion and any known connection between the Israelites and the Hyksos would also explain why these new Egyptian kings wanted to enslave the Israelites in order to avoid their aiding any potential invaders (Exodus 1:10). The frequent campaigns in the Syro-Canaanite area brought back large groups of enslaved Semites as part of the spoils, which made the idea of submitting Semitic groups to slavery a common practice. Regardless of exactly how the Hyksos and the Israelites align historically, we can be sure that the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt during the height of Egypt’s power during the New Kingdom. While from the biblical point of view, everything in the Israelites’ lives during slavery was centered on the building projects they were forced to work on (Exodus 1:11), from the Egyptian vantage, the Israelites would have been one small cog in the machinery that kept the kingdom prosperous and expanding. Israelites would later use artisan skills as they built bronze snakes, an ark, the tabernacle, and homes in Canaan.[46] In fact, it is clear that the long sojourn in Egypt had a cultural influence on the Israelites.[47]

The Bible places the Israelites near the northeastern delta of the Nile, a place with little stone, dictating that almost all building was done with mud bricks. Egyptian records bear witness to the forced mining and brick-making activities of various groups in Egypt, including other Semites. [48] Scenes from Egyptian tombs record that taskmasters insured that those they oversaw made their quota of bricks, which were made using straw, mud, and the sun.[49] Sadly, mud-brick structures do not last the way stone structures do, and we cannot hope to find remains of Israelite settlements in an area with a high water table, such as this area found in this branch of the Nile Delta. Fortunately for the Israelites, they were far north and east, near the frontier. And though the frontier was fortified and guarded,[50] they were not geographically far away from escape. However, in terms of ability, such escape was impossibly distant for them.

We cannot know with any degree of certainty when the story of Moses would have taken place.[51] However, our best indicators are probably the names of the cities the enslaved Israelites helped build: Pithom and Raamses (Exodus 1:11).[52] These cities are, respectively, most likely modern tell el-Retabeh, which is near Wadi Tumilat, and nearby Qantir, which is adjacent to Avaris.[53] Knowing when these cities were built allows us to postulate that the most likely setting for the story of Moses is in the early Ramesside era, under the kings Seti I and Rameses II (or Rameses the Great).[54] If we operate under this assumption, a nice, round date for the Exodus would be 1250 BC. We must keep in mind that this date is speculative; it is based on analyzed information to be sure, but it is still speculative. Nevertheless, it is still our most profitable point of culture to examine as we try to paint a picture of what life may have been like for young Moses and what he may have dealt with as he interacted with Pharaoh while trying to free the Israelites from bondage.

Moses was nursed by his own mother until the age of weaning, which was probably around three years old.[55] It is quite likely that at her knee he learned something of his heritage and their family’s religious beliefs. Still, Moses would have spent most of his growing years in the royal harem, the institution where Pharaoh insured that his family members were raised and educated properly (Exodus 2:10). It is also informative to realize that this was a period when foreign princes were brought to Pharaoh’s court and educated along with the elite of Egypt. It is probable that Moses’s foreign origins were not hidden. If so, he likely would have been viewed in a manner similar to these foreign princes, and he probably received the same excellent academic and cultural education. We know he was “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22). Moreover, it seems quite possible that those with a knowledge of anything Semitic would have been used in the Sinai mining expeditions. If this is the case, Moses may have became familiar with the Sinai area in his youth under Egyptian tutelage, which gave him some experience in a region he would later use as an escape for the Israelites.

During this era, Egypt was in many ways at its empire’s apogee. Continuing the post-Hyksos expansion into Canaan and Syria, the empire attained its geographic and military height under Thutmosis III,[56] who gained dominance in the area over impinging empires such as the Hittites and Mitanni, as well as over local rulers. The years of dominance in the area could not last forever, and after several powerful Egyptian rulers, various conditions created a situation in which Egypt’s power in the area waned. The Amarna Letters, a set of diplomatic correspondence found in Egypt, help to illustrate the control Egypt once had as well as the wavering and shifting in political alliances toward the end of the Eighteenth Dynasty that were part of the loss of some of that control.

At the beginning of the Nineteenth Dynasty, under Seti I (ca. 1290–1280 BC), Egypt resurged in both its ability to control the area and in the perception of Egypt’s power in the minds of those in the area. If our posited dating of the Exodus is correct, this is the precise time Moses was being raised in the court. Moses probably came of age in an Egyptian court that was experiencing a real revival of empire, power, and cultural pride. Seti and his son and successor, Rameses II, brought Egypt back to nearly its largest geographic and military extent, and they helped Egypt reach new heights in building, appearance, and pomp. In particular for our purposes, Rameses II conquered and, at least briefly, controlled the Galilean area; the Phoenician and Canaanite coasts, including cities such as Akko, Tyre, Sidon, and Byblos; and areas farther south such as Jerusalem, Jericho, and the plains and towns of Moab, such as Dibon.[57] While Rameses II may not have maintained full presence or control in this area, he made it clear that Egypt was again the superpower in charge, and all took note.

If this is the right period, then as Moses grew up, he witnessed Egypt reasserting itself and intentionally striving to reach its unparalleled dominant status that had slipped away for a few generations. The might and prestige of Egypt was propagandized at home as well as abroad. The court Moses was raised in was one of sumptuous prestige. Members of the royal harem stayed in any of a number of lavish palaces that dotted the Nile. These buildings incorporated pools and gardens, were decorated in precious stones such as lapis lazuli and green malachite, and housed staff that prepared exquisite food. The palace at the new capital of Pi-Rameses, which the Israelites seem to have been forced to help build, was known for its stunning architecture, airy rooms, and extravagant atmosphere.[58] The military Moses witnessed was efficient but was fond of glorious display.

Moses’s Ethiopian wife (Numbers 12:1) perhaps attests the fact that he was at least partially involved in Egypt’s foreign diplomacy and would have had firsthand knowledge of Egypt’s vast holdings abroad and the enviable position it held in the eyes of its foreign neighbors. He probably witnessed the building of some of the most amazing structures the world has ever seen. He would have seen the regal ceremonies that were a regular part of royal life and must have been schooled, probably starting at age five, not just in subjects such as writing, math, and architecture but also in the religious ideas that portrayed the king as semidivine. Because we know that some of Moses’s contemporaries, were taught of the already old and grand history of Egypt, we can presume that Moses was also taught of Egypt’s history. He likely studied sites such as the pyramids, which were already a thousand years old. He would have been taught that the Egyptian court was heir to an ancient and glorious past, encompassing kings of untold wonder and numerous gods of unimaginable power, and that all the glory of ancient Egypt was recaptured in their day. Even if he was the least among the harem, which is possible, Moses was part of a privileged and elegant upbringing. No wonder he had never supposed that man was “nothing” in comparison with God (Moses 1:10).

Wilderness and Conquest

As the Israelites left Egypt,[59] the route of the Exodus kept them from encountering the major forts and encounters with the forces of the Egyptians,[60] including the way of the Philistines and the way of Shur, the shortest and most direct routes to Canaan. The Exodus most likely began near Avaris/Raameses, an area that preserves many linguistic remnants of Semitic place-names, including a likely name and location for biblical Goshen.[61] While we cannot trace the route specifically from there, we know they avoided the more traveled and well-garrisoned route and instead went largely east and a little south.[62] Despite that fact that they were pursued and miraculously delivered, the Israelites journey largely kept them out of the way of sites with a strong Egyptian presence.[63]

Similarly, their forty-year sojourn in the wilderness most likely kept them out of Canaan and in obscure and unoccupied places as Egypt’s interest and presence in Canaan waned,[64] though at times they certainly did travel through areas that were part of the Egyptian routes of trade and control. For example, the Israelites camped at Dibon, a city that a few Egyptian kings, including Ramses II, had conquered.[65] In fact, part of the Israelite route on the east side of Jordan seems to have followed an Egyptian military route.[66]

Yet, as Joshua took the Israelites into the promised land as he encountered kings of cities and their coalitions, he mention nothing about Egypt. This does not mean that the Israelites did not deal with Egypt’s presence. We may be able to subtly detect Egypt’s weakening influence as we look at lists of towns Joshua occupied but did not maintain control over. It is possible that at least some of the cities that Joshua and the children of Israel chose not to occupy were those that they knew could host Egyptian officials and troops at some point. While we cannot know, it is worth considering. For example, Joshua and the Israelites conquered the inhabitants of Jerusalem, but they did not occupy the city, and later we find that it was still inhabited by Canaanites. This is probably because conquest does not mean either annihilation or occupation, and the Israelites were too pastoral and too small to occupy every city they conquered. While the inhabitants of Jerusalem were beaten in battle by Joshua, at this same time some records indicate that Jerusalem was under Egypt’s influence.[67] The choice to occupy some areas but not Jerusalem, though it had been defeated, may have been made because of the known possibility of the return of an Egyptian force to that city.

The Egyptians controlled little of the area between Megiddo and Jerusalem,[68] making this an area that would have been very attractive for early Israelite settlement. Subsequently, since around the beginning of the thirteenth century, the region was in a power vacuum, caught between a military stalemate between Egypt and the Hittites, and was prime for takeover and a new occupation by smaller communities and developing city-states. The hill country of Ephraim, some of the first Israelite areas to flourish according to the biblical record, is matched by the archaeological discovery of some of the Israelites’ earliest settlements in this same area.[69] Many think this is exactly the area the Merneptah Stele places the Israelite tribes that Merneptah battles, though some have speculated that it refers to an area in the northernmost parts of Galilee.[70]

After the Israelite conquest of Canaan, the aforementioned Merneptah record is the only evidence we have of the Israelites’ contact with Egypt during this era. The confrontation described in the stela is not mentioned in the Bible—which does not make a record of every event the Israelites were part of, just the ones necessary for teaching the theological message the book is created for. However, knowledge of Merneptah’s successful raid against the Israelites (who are mentioned by name in the inscription—the first time any extrabiblical writings mention them) in Canaan demonstrates that Egypt still had a presence there and that the Israelites may have dealt with the Egyptians more than we often think.[71]

Egypt maintained good control over some areas, such as the Phoenician coast,[72] central Syria,[73] and southern Canaanite towns such as Gezer,[74] Lachish[75] and Jerusalem.[76] Only a few northern Canaanite sites seem to exhibit significant Egyptian presence, and these sites, such as Megiddo and Beth-Shean,[77] sat at the crossroads of trade routes. The polities Merneptah fought against were in between areas the Egyptians controlled well.

While the rebellions may be an expression of the typical case of countries believing that the death of a powerful king was a good time to assert independence,[78] some have speculated that the war resulted from a failure to send tribute to Egypt, which could have been caused by the destruction of armies and crops brought about by the invading Israelites.[79] Thus Merneptah’s campaign may have been to procure the needed tribute, and upon learning of the reason for the disruption, to then turn to punishing the Israelite (and other) raiders causing the problems. This is an appealing scenario because it harmonizes biblical and political narratives provided from a variety of sources. It is also possible that the battles against these Canaanite entities were part of a plan of making an overland trade route between Egypt and Syria secure.[80]

Whatever the cause of Merneptah’s campaign, it is clear that Egypt still had a vested interest in and some ability to control Canaan as the Israelites were settling there. Still, their entrance into Canaan took place as Egypt’s claim to that part of the world was waning. There would be a very brief resurgence during the period of the Judges, which would mark the end of Egypt’s real control in the area. The invasion of the Sea People—the Philistines—and Rameses III’s battle against them[81] heralded the effectual beginning of the end of Egyptian control of the Syrian and Canaanite areas for many years. This is about the same time period that Deborah and Barak found success against the Canaanites, success that carried them all the way to Megiddo, a place that had been a former Egyptian stronghold. Megiddo had probably just become something of a power vacuum as the Egyptians shrank back to their native land while the Philistines grew in power but had not yet encroached on Israelite or Canaanite lands that were far away from the coast. The Egyptian abandonment of the coastal areas of Canaan to the Philistines creates a conflict that will mark much of the Israelites’ early history. It is the Israelites and the Philistines that step into the power vacuum created by Egypt’s substantial withdrawal from the region.

Conclusion

It seems that the first part of Israelite history is marked by interaction with Egypt interspersed with careful avoidance. From Abraham and Sarah into the beginning of the period of the Judges, the characters of the Bible experienced uneven relations with Egypt. They were welcomed, enriched, educated, and saved by the Egyptians. The Israelites were also enslaved, almost annihilated, nearly sacrificed, and purchased by the Egyptians. While these events are so important they are reported in our biblical text, the quiet norm seems to have been that of the Israelites keeping a healthy distance from Egypt. This may have been the most common and prudent course for Abraham, Sarah, and their descendants most of the time; still there is no doubt that both the encounters and the non-encounters between the Israelites and the Egyptians shaped much of the early Israelite history.

Knowing some of these specifics allows us to picture the lives of biblical characters in a more concrete way. Being able to visualize their lives makes the stories more real to us. Both picturing the lives of the biblical characters and appreciating the reality of their lives allows us to better apply their stories and teachings to our own lives. While it is worthwhile to examine the details of the biblical historico-cultural environment, it becomes much more meaningful if we allow such an exploration to cause us to think more deeply about the lives of the people we are studying.

Notes

[1] John M. Lundquist, “The Exodus,” in Studies in Scripture, Volume Three: Genesis to 2 Samuel, ed. Kent P. Jackson and Robert L. Millet (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1989), 112. Many historical studies also use this approximate date. See also the discussion by Pierce in this volume.

[2] John Gee, “Overlooked Evidence for Sesotris III’s Foreign Policy,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt (2004): 23–31.

[3] In this reference Merneptah mentions a series of locations, each followed by an Egyptian hieroglyph that indicates that these locations were geographical places. The word Israel is followed not by the glyph that indicates a geographic location but by a glyph that indicates a group of people.

[4] See Dan’el Kahn, “A Geo-Political and Historical Perspective of Mernephtah’s Policy in Canan,” in The Ancient Near East in the 12th–10th Centuries BCE: Culture and History, ed. Gershon Galil et al., Alter Orient und Altes Testament 392 (Munster, Germany: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012), 255–68; M. G. Hasel, “Israel in the Merneptah Stele,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 296 (1994): 45–61; Kenneth A. Kitchen, “The Physical Text of Merenptah’s Victory Hymn (The ‘Israel Stela’),” Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 29 (1994): 71–76. Kahn’s article contains a good summary of the scholarship on this important stela.

[5] See Shmuel Ahituv, “The Exodus—Survey of the Theories of the Last Fifty Years,” in Jerusalem Studies in Egyptology, ed. Irene Shirun-Grumach (Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1998), 132; Manfred Bietak, “Comments on the ‘Exodus,’” in Egypt, Israel, Sinai, ed. Anson F. Rainey (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1987); Sarah I. Groll, “The Egyptian Background of the Exodus and the Crossing of the Red Sea: A New Reading of Papyrus Anastasi VIII,” in Shirun-Grumach, Jerusalem Studies in Egyptology, 189–92. See also Frank J. Yurco, “Merenptah’s Canaanite Campaign and Israel’s Origins,” in Exodus: the Egyptian Evidence, ed. Ernest S. Frerichs and Leonard H. Lesko (Winona Lake, In: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 50, who uses the Merenptah Stela, Exodus 15, Judges 5, and “the milieu of Ramesses II’s Egypt,” to date “the root of the Exodus story to the Ramesside era.”

[6] See Kerry Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking in Egypt,” in Egypt, Canaan and Israel: History, Imperialism, Ideology and Literature, ed. S. Bar, D. Kahn, and J. J. Shirley, Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 52 (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2011), 190–235. See also Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 81.

[7] Susan L. Cohen, “Synchronisms and Significance: Reevaluating Interconnections Between Middle Kingdom Egypt and the Southern Levant,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 4, no. 3 (2012): 1–8.

[8] See Gee, “Overlooked Evidence for Sesotris III’s Foreign Policy,” 23–31. See also Susan L. Cohen, Canaanites, Chronologies, and Connections: The Relationship of Middle Bronze IIA Canaan to Middle Kingdom Egypt (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2002), 50, 139.

[9] See Aylward M. Blackman, The Rock-Tombs of Meir (London: Egypt Exploration Society, 1915), pl. 4; Amihai Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Reference Library (New York: Doubleday, 1990), 187; Manfred Bietak, “Canaanites in the Eastern Nile Delta,” in Rainey, Egypt, Israel, Sinai, 50; Sami Farag, “Un insciption memphite de la XIIe dynastie,” Revue d'Égyptologie 32 (1980): 75–82, pls. 3–5; H. Altenmüller and A. M. Moussa, “Die Inschrift Amenemhets II aus dem Ptah-Tempel von Memphis. Ein Vorbericht” SAK 18 (1991): 1–48; John Gee and Stephen D. Ricks, “Historical Plausibility: The Historicity of the Book of Abraham as a Case Study,” in Historicity and the Latter-day Saint Scriptures, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2001), 77; Georges Posener, “Fragment littéraire de Moscou,” Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 25 (1969): 101–6; Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 77–78.

[10] See Farag, “Un insciption memphite de la XIIe dynastie,” 75–82, pls. 3–5; H. Altenmüller A. M. Moussa, “Die Inschrift Amenemhets II aus dem Ptah-Tempel von Memphis Ein Vorbericht,” 1–48; Gee and Ricks, “Historical Plausibility” in Hoskisson, Historicity and the Latter-day Saint Scriptures, 77. Regarding Egyptian trade routes, see Wolfgang Helck, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien in 3. und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr. (Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrasowitz, 1962), 63.

[11] See, for example, Gabriella Matthiae, “The Relations between Ebla and Egypt,” in The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, ed. E. D. Oren (Philadelphia: The University Museum, 1997), 420–21. See also H. A. Liebowitz, “Bone and Ivory Inlay from Syria and Palestine,” Israel Exploration Journal 27 (1977): 89–97; J. Von Beckerath, Unterschungen zur politischen Gesichte der zweiten Zwischenzeit in Ägypten (Glückstadt, Germany: Augistin, 1956), 250; Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 187; Biri Fay, The Louvre Sphinx and Royal Sculpture from the Reign of Amenenhat II (Mainz, Germany: Philipp von Zabern, 1006), 64, 68, pl. 94; R. Giveon “The Impact of Egypt on Canaan in the Middle Bronze Age,” Israel, Egypt, Sinai, A. F. Rainey, ed. ((Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1987), 27; Matthiae, “The Relations between Ebla and Egypt,” 422; Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 81; Kurt Bittel, Hattusha, the Capital of the Hittites (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970), 114–15; Rachael Sparks, “Egyptian Stone Vessels in Syro–Palestine During the Second Millennium B.C. and Their Impact on the Local Stone Vessel Industry,” in Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Near East: Papers Read at a Symposium Held at the University of Melbourne, Department of Classics and Archaeology (29–30 September 1994), ed. Guy Bunnens (Louvain, Belgium: Peeters, 1996), 66.

[12] See Pierre Montet, Byblos et l’Egypte: Quatre compagnes de fouilles a Gebeil 1921–1922–1923–1924 (Paris, Geuthnerr: 1929), 127–39; Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 187; William Ward, Egypt and the East Mediterranean World, 2200–1900 B.C.: Studies in Egyptian Foreign Relations during the First Intermediate Period (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1971), 62–63; Barry J. Kemp, “Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period,” in Ancient Egypt: A Social History, ed. B. G. Trigger, et al. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 145–46; Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 187; Giveon, [Title], 24; James Allen, “The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dashur: Preliminary Report,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 352 (2008): 29–39; Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking,” 190–99.

[13] See Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking,” 194–95.

[14] See William C. Hayes, “Career of the Great Steward Henenu under Nebhetpetre Mentuhotpe,” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 35 (1949): 43–49; James P. Allen, “Some Theban Officials of the Early Middle Kingdom,” in Studies in Honor of William Kelly Simpson, ed. Peter der Manuelian (Boston: Museum of Fine Arts, 1996), 1:18–21; Gregory Mumford, “Syria-Palestine,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, ed. Donald B. Redford (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 338.

[15] On the applicability of these texts to this period, see Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking,” 195–97.

[16] See Georges Posener and Baudouin van de Walle, Princes et pays d'Asie et de Nubie: Textes hiératiques sur des figurines d'envoûtement du moyen empire suivis de Remarques paléographiques sur lest textes similaires de Berlin, par B. van de Walle (Brusels: Fondation égyptologique rein Élisabeth, 1940); Kurt Sethe, Die Ächtung feindlicher Fürsten, Völker und Dinge auf altägyptischen Tongefässcherben des mittleren Reiches, nach den Originalen im Berliner Museum, ed. Berlin Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu, Abhandlungen, Jahrg. 1926, Nr. 5 (Berlin: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Kommission bei Walter de Gruyter, 1926); Andre Vila, “Un Depot de Textes D'Envoûtement au Moyen Empire,” Journal des Savants 41 (1963), 135-160; Yvan Koenig, “Les textes d'envoûtement de Mirgissa,” Revue d'Égyptologie (1990): 101–28; Amnon Ben-Tor, “Do the Execration Texts Reflect an Accurate Picture of the Contemporary Settlement Map of Palestine?,” in Essays on Ancient Israel in its Near Eastern Context: A Tribute to Nadav Na’aman, ed. Y. Amit et al. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 63–87; Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 88; and Mazar, Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 186.

[17] See Wolfgang Helck, Die Beziehungen Ägyptens zu Vorderasien im 3. Und 2. Jahrtausend v. Chr., 2nd ed. (Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrasowitz, 1971), 39d–40; Ward, Egypt and the East Mediterranean, 62; Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 82–90; Mumford, “Syria-Palestine,” 338.

[18] See Ward, Egypt and the East Mediterranean, 59–60.

[19] See Kemp, “Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period,” 143; Mumford, “Syria-Palestine,” 337.

[20] See Farag, “Un insciption memphite de la XIIe dynastie,” 75–82, pls. 3–5; Ian Shaw, “Egypt and the Outside World,” in The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, ed. Ian Shaw (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 325. We know of one expedition that brought back 1554 prisoners. See J. Malek and S. Quirke, “Memphis, 1991: Epigraphy,” Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 78 (1992): 14.

[21] See Gee, “Overlooked Evidence,” 30. One of his soldiers mentions specifically fighting in skmm, which is probably Shechem, thus confirming the indications of the Execration Texts mentioned earlier. See John Garstand, El Arábah (London: B. Quaritch, 1900), pls. IV–V; Mumford, “Syria-Palestine,” 338; and Kemp, “Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period,” 143.

[22] “Inscription of Naram-Sin, the Campaign against Armanu and Ebla,” in Monumental Inscriptions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger Jr., The Context of Scripture (Boston: Brill, 2003), 2:245. The line reads, “From the Bank of the Euphrates until Ulisum.” See also Benjamin R. Foster, Before the Muses: An Anthology of Akkadian Literature (Bethesda, MD: CDL, 1993), 1:53. See also Hans Hirsch, “Die Inschriften der Könige von Agade,” Archiv für Orientforschung 20 (1963): 74; Benjamin R. Foster, “The Siege of Armanum,” Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies 14 (1982): 29.

[23] See James P. Allen, “The Historical Inscription of Khnumhotep at Dashur: Preliminary Report,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 352 (2008): 29–39.

[24] See the discussion in Stephen O. Smoot, BYU Studies Quarterly 56, no. 3 (2017): 7–37, esp. 33–34.

[25] See J. R. Kupper, “Uršu,” Revue d’assyriologie 43 (1949): 80–82; Albrecht Goetze, “An Old Babylonian Itenerary,” Journal of Cuneiform Studies 7 (1953): 69–70; John Gee, “Has Olishem been Discovered?,” in The Journal of Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 22, no. 2 (2013): 104–7; John Lundquist, “Was Abraham in Ebla?” in Studies in Scripture II: The Pearl of Great Price, ed. Robert L. Millet and Kent P. Jackson (Salt Lake City: Randall, 1985), 234–35; Paul Y. Hoskisson, “Where Was Ur of the Chaldees?,” in The Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God, ed. H. Donl Peterson and Charles W. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1989), 136 n44; John Gee, “Abracadabra, Isaac and Jacob,” in Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 7, no. 1 (1995): 26–27.

[26] See Cohen, “Synchronisms and Significance,” 1–8.

[27] See Genesis 20:1, 21:32, 23:2, 24:62, 26:17, 26:22, 26:23, 33:18, 35:1, 35:16, 37:14, etc.

[28] For example, it is a town listed in the Execration Texts noted above.

[29] See Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking,” 190–99 for a summary of this activity.

[30] Garstand, El Arábah, pls. IV–V; Mumford, “Syria-Palestine,” 338, Kemp, “Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period,” 143.

[31] See O. Negbi and S. Moskowitz, “The ‘Foundation Deposits’ or ‘Offering Deposits’ of Byblos,” Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental Research, 184 (1966): 21–26; William Stevenson Smith, “Influence of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt in Western Asia, especially in Byblos,” American Journal of Archaeology 73, no. 3 (1969): 279–80; Harvey Weiss, ed., Ebla to Damascus: Art and Archaeology of Ancient Syria, a catalogue of an exhibition from the Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums Syrian Arab Republic (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1985), 239–40, objects 112–13; Liebowitz, “Bone and Ivory Inlay from Syria and Palestine,” 89–97; G. Scandone Matthiae, “Egyptianizing Ivory Inlays from Palace P at Ebla,” Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syriennes 40 (1990): 146–60.

[32] See Percy E. Newberry, Beni Hasan, 4 vols. (London, 1893–1900); Dietrich Wildung, Sesostris und Amenemhet: Ägyten im Mittleren Reich (Munich: Hirmer, 1984), 185–86; Hans Goedicke, “Abi-Sha(i)’s Representation in Beni Hasan,” in Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 21 (1984): 203–10; Steven Feldman, “Not as Simple as A-B-C,” Biblical Archaeology Review 26, no. 1 (2000): 12.

[33] Kemp, “Old Kingdom, Middle Kingdom and Second Intermediate Period,” 155.

[34] See Posener, “Les Asiatiques,” 154–55; Kenneth A. Kitchen, “Early Canaanites in Rio de Janeiro and a ‘Corrupt’ Ramesside Land-Sale,” in Studies in Egyptology Presented to Miriam Lichtheim, ed. Sarah Israelit-Groll (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1990), 2:635–45; G. T. Martin, Egyptian Administrative and Private–Name Seals (Oxford: Griffith Institute, 1971), 78–85.

[35] Posener, “Les Asiatiques,” 145–63; William F. Albright, “Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth Century B.C.,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 74 (1954): 222–33; William C. Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom in the Brooklyn Museum (New York: The Brooklyn Museum, 1955); Erik Hornung, History of Ancient Egypt, an Introduction, trans. David Lorton (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999), 61; Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom, 99.

[36] This is well attested by the sudden buildup of “middle-hall” houses and Semitic burials. See Manfred Bietak, “The Center of Hyksos Rule: Avaris ‘Tel el-Dab’a,’” in The Hyksos: New Historical and Archaeological Perspectives, ed. E. Oren (Philadelphia: University Museum Press, 1997), 97–99.

[37] Bietak, “The Center of Hyksos Rule,” 103.

[38] Bietak, “Egypt and Canaan During the Middle Bronze Age,” 89; Holladay, “Tell el-Maskhuta,” 63; Hoffmeir, Israel in Egypt, The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), 63–64.

[39] See Holladay, “Tell el-Maskhuta,” 63; Holladay, “The Eastern Nile Delta,” 201–9; Bietak, “Canaanites in the Eastern Nile Delta,” 43; and Hoffmeir, Israel in Egypt, 63–66.

[40] See Muhlestein, “Levantine Thinking,” 201–4; Bietak, “Center of Hyksos Rule,” 113.

[41] For example, see Bietak, “Center of Hyksos Rule,” 108–9.

[42] See Hornung, History of Ancient Egypt, 61; Hayes, A Papyrus of the Late Middle Kingdom, 99.

[43] See John Van Seters, The Hyksos, A New Investigation (New Haven, CT: Wipf and Stock, 1966).

[44] See the Kamose Stela; Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 126–29.

[45] See Kurt Sethe, Urkunden des aegytischen Altertums IV: der 18. Dynastie (Leipzig, 1906), 1695-1697.

[46] See Scott B. Noegel, “The Egyptian Origin of the Ark of the Covenant,” Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective: Text, Archaeology, Culture, and Geoscience, ed. Thomas E. Levy, Thomas Schneider, William H.C. Propp (New York: Springer International Publishing, 2013), 223–42; John D. Currid, Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1997), 142–51; Kenneth A. Kitchen, “The Tabernacle—a Bronze Age Artifact,” Eretz-Israel, Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies 24 (1993): 119–29. Benjamin J. Noonan, “Egyptian Loanwords as Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition,” in “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?” Biblical, Archaeological, and Egyptological Perspectives on the Exodus Narratives, ed. James K. Hoffmeier, Alan R. Millard, and Gary A. Rendsburg (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2016), 49–67, demonstrates that many of the words used for the tabernacle and its accoutrements are loanwords from Egypt, suggesting that they were also accoutrements known to the Israelites from their time in Egypt.

[47] James K. Hoffmeier, “Egyptian Religious Influences on the Early Hebrews,” in Hoffmeier, Millard, and Rendsburg,“Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?,” 4–7, argues for overall influence, and the specifically outlines influence seen in names, 18–27, and in narratives concerning the priesthood, 27–34. Similarly, Richard S. Hess, “Onomastics of the Exodus Generation in the Book of Exodus,” in in Hoffmeier, Millard, and Rendsburg, “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?,” 37–48, demonstrates the presence of Egyptian names among the Israelites that come from the correct time period for the Exodus.

[48] See Kenneth A. Kitchen, “From the Brickfields of Egypt,” Tyndale Bulletin 27 (1967): 143–44; Jonathan Kirsch, Moses: A Life (New York: Ballantine Books, 1998), 76.

[49] Kirsch, Moses: A Life, 76.

[50] See James K. Hoffmeier, “The ‘Walls of the Ruler’ in Egyptian Literature and the Archaeological Record: Investigating Egypt’s Eastern Frontier in the Bronze Age,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 343 (2006): 1–20.

[51] On this, see Lawrence T. Geraty, “Exodus Dates and Theories,” in Levy, Schneider, and Propp, Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective, 55–64.

[52] This next section is very similar to something that I published as part of a textbook. See Kerry Muhlestein, “The Exodus,” in A Bible Reader’s History of the Ancient World, ed. Kent P. Jackson (Provo, UT: Jerusalem Center for Near Eastern Studies, Brigham Young University, 2016), 119–32. The material was first written for this book, but when I thought that this book may not come about, I used, for this section, portions of what I had written for the chapter of the textbook. The two publications have grown organic differences, but portions of them are very similar.

[53] See James K. Hoffmeier, “The Exodus and Wilderness Narratives,” in Ancient Israel’s History, an Introduction to Issues and Sources, ed. Bill T. Arnold and Richard S. Hess (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2014), 59–63; Manfred Bietak, “On the Historicity of the Exodus: What Egyptology Today Can Contribute to Assessing the Biblical Account of the Sojourn in Egypt,” in Levy, Schneider, and Propp, Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective, 26–31.

[54] See James K. Hoffmeier, “What is the Biblical Date for the Exodus? A Response to Bryant Wood,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50, no. 2 (2007): 225–47; Kenneth A. Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant: The Life and Times of Ramesses II (Warminster, PA: Aris and Phillips, 1982), 70–71; James K. Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt, the Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 116–21. Richard C. Steiner, “The Practices of the Land of Egypt (Leviticus 18:3): Incest ᶜAnat, and Israel in the Egypt of Ramesses the Great,” in Hoffmeier, Millard, and Rendsburg, “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?,” 79–91, uses evidence for incest and worship of Anat in the days of Ramesesses II to argue for dating the Exodus to the era of Ramesses.

[55] See Rosalind M. and Jac. J. Janssen, Growing Up and Getting Old in Ancient Egypt (London: Golden House, 2007), 13–19.

[56] On the height of Thutmosis III’s power, see Yosef Mizrachy, “The Eighth Campaign of Thutmose III Revisited,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections 4, no. 2 (2012): 24–52.

[57] See Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant, 67–68.

[58] See Mark A. Simpkins and Susan Taylor, Ramses II (Salt Lake City: Simpkins, 1985), 31.

[59] On the role of the Plagues in the ability of the Israelites to leave Egypt, see the article on the Plagues in this volume. For some time now many scholars have doubted whether the Israelites came from Egypt at all, and instead propose that an indigenous group of Canaanites became what would be known as the Israelites. K. Lawson Younger Jr., “Recent Developments in Understanding the Origins of the Arameans. Possible Contributions and Implications for Understanding Israelite Origins,” in “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?”, 199-222, demonstrates the flaws with the ways this has been proposed thus far.

[60] See Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006), 268–69; James K. Hoffmeier, “Tell el-Borg on Egypt’s Eastern Frontier,” Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt, 41 (2004), 85–111; Orly Goldwasser and Eliezer Oren, “Marine Unites on the ‘Ways of Horus’ in the Days of Seti I,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, 7, no.1 (2015): 25–38; Gregory Mumford, “The Sinai Peninsula and Its Environs: Our Changing Perceptions of a Pivotal Land Bridge Between Egypt, the Levant, and Arabia,” Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, 7, no.1 (2015), 1–24.

[61] See Bietak, “On the Historicity of the Exodus,” 21–22; Groll, “The Egyptian Background of the Exodus,” in Shirun-Grumach, Jerusalem Studies in Egyptology (Wiesbaden, Germany: Otto Harrassowitz, 1998), 190.

[62] See Stephen O. Moshier and James K. Hoffmeier, “Which Way Out of Egypt? Physical Geography Related to the Exodus Itinerary,” in Levy, Schneider, and Propp, Israel’s Exodus in Transdisciplinary Perspective, 105–7; Bietak, “On the Historicity of the Exodus,” 27–31; Hoffmeier, “The Exodus and Wilderness Narratives,” 65–81.

[63] See Muhlestein, “The Exodus,” 119–32.

[64] Unfortunately, a nomadic presence leaves little to nothing in the way of archaeological remains, which makes difficult to impossible to use archaeology to trace the route. See Thomas W. Davis, “Exodus on the Ground: The Elusive Signature of Nomads in Sinai,” in Hoffmeier, Millard, and Rendsburg, “Did I Not Bring Israel Out of Egypt?,” 223–27. Davis hopes to be able to trace contact with nomads at Egyptian sites (228–39), but since the Exodus route seems to have specifically avoided such contact, it is unlikely that this will do much to help refine the route.

[65] Charles R. Krahmalkov, “Exodus Itinerary Confirmed by Egyptian Evidence,” Biblical Archaeology Review 20, no. 4 (1994): 54–62.

[66] Krahmalkov, “Exodus Itinerary Confirmed by Egyptian Evidence,” 45–62.

[67] See Yurco, “Merenptah’s Canaanite Campaign and Israel’s Origins,” 30.

[68] See Yurco, “Merenptah’s Canaanite Campaign and Israel’s Origins,” 30.

[69] See Lawrence Stager, “The Archeology of the Family in Ancient Israel,” Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 260 (November 1985), 1–35.

[70] See Dan’el Kahn, “A Geo-Political and Historical Perspective of Mernephtah’s Policy in Canan,” in The Ancient Near East in the 12th – 10th Centuries BCE: Culture and History, Gershon Galil, Ayelet Gilboa, Aren M. Maeir, and Dan’el Kahn, eds., Alter Orient und Altes Testament, vol. 392 (Munster: Ugarit-Verlag, 2012), 260. Some have speculated that Israel was actually still east of the Jordan when Merneptah found them. See Bietak, “On the Historicity of the Exodus,” 30.

[71] See Yurco, “Merenptah’s Canaanite Campaign and Israel’s Origins,” 30–31.

[72] Kahn, “Geo-Political and Historical View,” 258–60.

[73] Edward Lipinski, The Aramaeans: Their Ancient History, Culture, Religion (Louvain, Belgium: Peeters, 2000), 32–33; Itamar Singer, “A Political History of Ugarit,” in Handbook of Ugaritic Studies, ed. W. G. E. Watson and N. Wyatt (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1999), 708–12.

[74] E. J. Piltcher, “Portable Sundial from Gezer,” Palestine Exploration Fund Quarterly Statement 55 (1923): 85–89.

[75] Kenneth A. Kitchen, Rammesside Inscriptions, Historical and Biographical, vol. 4 (Oxford:Blackwell Press, 1982) 4:39.

[76] Gary Rendsburg, “Merneptah in Canaan,” Journal of the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities 11 (1981): 171–72; Gabriel Barkay, “A Late Bronze Age Egyptian Temple in Jerusalem?,” Israel Exploration Journal 46 (1996): 23–43; Kenneth A. Kitchen, “Jerusalem in Ancient Egyptian Documents,” in Jerusalem before Islam, ed. Z. Kafafi and R. Schick (Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, 2007), 32–34.

[77] Kahn, “Geo-Political and Historical View,” 260.

[78] See Kenneth A. Kitchen, “The Victories of Merenptah, and the Nature of their Record,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 28 (2004): 265–66.

[79] See Kitchen, Reliability of the Old Testament, 228–29. Contra this view, see Kahn, “Geo-Political and Historical View,” 260–61.

[80] See Itamar Singer, “Merneptah’s Campaign to Canaan and the Egyptian Occupation of the Southern Coastal Plain of Palestine in the Ramesside Period,” Bulletin of the Schools of Oriental Research 269 (1988): 1–10.

[81] See Harold Hayden Nelson, Reliefs and Inscriptions at Karnak, vol. 4 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936).