evidence confirms biblical depiction of Edom

I think c. 1200-1100 bc is the earliest Edom could have really had a serious kingdom established. By 1200, Egypt and the Hittites had largely diminished in influence over Palestine and transjordan. But the area of Edom was indeed a cultural center for nomads & Shasu long before the Egyptians controlled palestine.The people of Israel established their kingdom around 1020 bc, and it seems very plausable that Edom and Moab established their kingdoms 100-200 years earlier, amidst the shrinkage of Egyptian power.The biblical tradition of wandering Israelites passing through the kingdom of Edom c. 1200's bc isn't really that problematic if Edom was just beginning to form it's monarchy at this point, but would have probably been a coalition of powerful tribes.Around 1200-1100 bc, all sorts of foreign peoples and nations began to stake claims for their share of greater Palestine. Philistines,Amorites, Canaanites, Moabites, and Edomites would have all carved out their portions of the land. And on top of this we have the Israelites and Hebrews who are another addition to this new era.It's probable that there would have been more than one exodus of Hebrews and slaves from egypt during this time period of Egypt's decline.Palestine was constantly under rural warfare even from the beginning of Egypt's 400 year dominance. In the 1400-1300's there were raiding parties of Shasu and Hapiru who attacked the cities of Canaan. many of these Hapiru and Shasu were captured and sent back to Egypt as slaves
(literally thousands at a time). By 1250 under Rameses rulership, Egypt was already beginning to Weaken, and Merenptah's campaign into Palestine had little affect, though it may have offset Israel's development for a generation or two.

My claim of a [c.]1020 bc establishment of Israel's kingdom is based off the biblical chronology of king Saul and David, aswell as the common view among scholars [who believe he existed] that David reigned c. 1000-970 bc.As for hill settelments of c. 1200-1100 bc, I have no absolute proof these were Israelite, but I feel that the biblical stories combined with Israel being mentioned in the Merenptah stele give reasonable probability that Israel was beginning to sprout fourth in the hill countries of Judah and transjordan, the very areas wich the bible mentions.What evidence do you have that the Apiru were any different than how I described? Sethos I mentions Apiru attacking a local city from mt. Jarmouth (1300 bc) he responds to these attacks and brings back some of these Apiru as slaves. Also, during his reign he responds to raiding Shasu along the via maris. The Amarna letters c. (1360-1330) are very descriptive concerning the Apiru who are causing civil problems among the vassal cities of Canaan. How do you see this differently?

Yes my claim of Saul is based off the biblical account.I have no absolute proof that the hill settlements were Israelite or not. I just thought that it was fairly well established--my error.Sethos I campaigns of Mt. Jarmuth: - - Against Shasu of N. Sinai, at the fortress of Tharu: The Military Campaigns of Seti II agree the Apiru were largely hired by local rulers as the Amarna letters indicate, but the Apiru also compromised wandering semi-ethnic bands of their own with different motives (King Idrimi of Alalakh among such a group c.1450 bc).

Carbon 14 dating and dendrochronology has really been a smacker to the standard chronology. The well known Thera erruption of course, being a very controversial example.....something like 120 years difference from conventional dates. : (

Not to stray away from the subject, but since we all seem to feel that the 600,000 man army was an exaggeration, what was the actual population of Palestine between 1400 and 1200 bc? I've heard some finkelsteinian figures as low as 70,000, and some others have suggested up to 500,000 in ancient Palestine. just wondering.