evidence confirms biblical depiction of Edom

The odd thing about Judea/Israel in not that so many sites have been confirmed, but how few.

The pastoral Israelites clearly conquered the hill country in 1550 BCE according to the undisputed archaeological evidence of a genocidal rampage through all of the highland areas during a period that Egypt was tied up (and sealed off from Palestine)fighting the Hyksos (during 1550 and for the next 25-40 years).We know from the evidence that the Biblical account is 100% supported, despite historians and archaeologists dreaming up non-existent Ahmose campaigns (which werent claimed) during a period that clearly preceded Ahmose's conquering of the Delta.As if Egyptians would smash through the highlands anyway.BUT , the cities (or locations, we arent sure how populated these towns were and worse....)in 1550 BCE were then at locations that were in many cases discontinued.The writtings tht made their way into Joshua (and the slightly different, and HIGHLY concise, angle covered in the early part of Judges)would reflect later names of locations near (or where the Israelites felt were near)the conquered areas.There were locations that continued from 1550 BCE to later times, but many did not.The latter is where troubles arise.We have a problem of Israelites (in Joshua 12) not even naming specific "correct" names to specific "correct" places.Israelites could have a place alled "EVC-ville" in 1200 BCE and maybe a tiny town they destroyed a few miles away in 1550 BCE would be described as "EVC-ville".Then we have the issue of our modern search problems. (looking in 1200 BCE for questionable geographic locations really ends the chances of being 100%, or anywhere near, accurate)Thankfully , we have had enough excavations that we can compare dates the Bible gives for Israelite battles (like 1170-1130 for Philistine opression in Judges, 1310 for Hazor destruction, c.1530 or later for previous Hazor destruction along with the rest of highland Palestine and some other ares)and then see what we can find for the major sites (at that point ,only Jerusalem and some heavily populated cities presents hugh hurdles)and then take a rough look at the less certain sites.Mind you, some will tell you "we are 100% certain about everything" but those are the same people who uncritically accepted the dreamed up claims of modern historians that "Ahmose destroyed all the highland cities at the end of the MBA" even though there isnt the slightest of splinters that can be presented as evidence.Infact , that claim has been falsified.To say "we havnt found evidence yet for the Ahmose campaigns we attached to him" is a non-starter that misses the point that he absolutely DID NOT and COULD NOT have (nor did he or Manetho claim)to have destroyed highland Palestine cities.I was please that the vast majority of Anchor Bible Dictionary articles didnt even claim to know what brought about the destructions at the end of the MBA.Sadely, some have tried however.In addition,some dance around and try to stretch a possible late MBA-early LBA site as far as possible to justify Thutmose III (like Gezer, which I went ahead and gave preliminarily).Here is another example, of a town I did not cover, from and article in the Anchor Bible dictionary. "The Israelite Period" always means the early part of Iron Age or later.They then move on to the Late Bronze period.Also , it is nice that the author admits that archaeology (above) cant find any archaeological evidence of Thutmose III's campaign for a MBA destruction.Frankly ,Thutmose III may have just written down towns he passed through and took tribute.James Hoffmier says that the Thutmose III (c1450)campaigns have been exaggerated by historians.Unlike William Dever (who has a lecture series going now that says how minimalists are a threat to modern western civilization because they trim a few hundred years off of ancient Israelite history)who attributes the extreme northern town of hazor to early 18th dynaty Egyptians, this responsible author(Avraham Biran)doesnt even try to suggest anything of the sort with northern Dan.By accident (due to universally messed up chronology , Bible scholarship and archaeological ignoring of nomads), Biran may actually have a Joshua/Judges detail right (Im not sure though).If you remember, Judges 18 is an undated period in the back of the book, where side stories are old of the anarchic ituation of the israelite tribes during the Judges period.I havnt checked to see exactly when the Dan tribes are mentioned as getting their land (plus the 1550 Conquest in many ways got lost right away or over time back to Canaanites)but from 1170-1130 (Samson and Philistine period)we have the only danite Judge mentioned in conflicts with Philistines.I havnt tried to figure anything out (if anything can infact be dated based on the vague scripture records), but the hacking up of Judges (and Joshua) may not have prevented a correct archaeological discovery here. The MBA destructions were during Joshua's Conquest , though not all battles and etails were recorded in scripture.Usually, you need to read labels of "Israelite Period" and "Canaanite Period" with a hefty grain of salt , especially when they are talking about events in Joshua and Judges.They get as far as 350 years off.Dever makes 3 mistakes (no!)in one in his Hazor article. He took a "c1220" date for the final Canaanite Hazor destruction and said it was too early for Joshuas Conquest.First of, all the edition of the Anchor Bible Dictionary he contributed to was about the same date David Rohl wrote his Pharoahs and Kings book.Rohl did his homework and talked to the archaeologists working at the site, and alerted us that the date for the final Canaanite destruction was being pushed back about 100 years.Dever apparantly did not.1st mistake:He dated the c1300 site too late by 75+ years to c1220 BCE.2nd mistake:He misread the Bible and thought that it was the Joshua battle (c1550 according to the Bible raw dates).Dever felt the Joshua battle (which he doesnt believe anyway)dated to 1210 BCE.3rd mistakeever didnt even consider the Judges battle (c1300 according to biblical dates).Though he was so far off on the Joshua dates, the fact that he was also badly off on the final Canaanite Hazor destruction almost brought the 2 manifestly incorrect dates together by chance. However,in his legendary arrogance,Dever felt he could still pin archaeology to suh detail that he could say a "1220 Joshua battle" was too early for "1210 Israelite" arrivals.That like saying you were born too late be at your daughters house 5 years before your daughter was born.As if that isnt bad enough sholarship.....Dever was one of the few archaeologists contributing to the Anchor Bible Dictionary who put blind faith in a 1550 BCE Egyptian Conquest by Egyptians kings who werent even rulers over all of Egypt then.Not that others dont jump to conclusions, its just that Dever can be counted on to be the last joker standing.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.

However, I would prefer to not edit something after a long time has passed since the post.My whole post needs to be rearranged (mainly fuller quotes of Brain and more quotes to make the reading easier)plus I may add a little additional material in.I would rather not risk anyones suspicion at my motives.I have seen some heated flame wars over editing in my days (not here!).Its why I generally dont correct such horrible spelling errors and typo's in older posts of mine though I notice them later.

Firt of all,Brian is taking many of these from a HUGE list in Chapter 12 of Joshua, that is dozens of sentences of bland naming of conquered cities.You can pick out many I suppose where you can nitpick at the evidence.Dor for example was a location where excavations were based on ancient Roman and Greek writtings (Mazar has a fortified MB city , but I cant find refernce to that yet). Maybe we should take the views of the ancient's with regards to Ai's location then.Et-Tell wouldnt be it then.Kirbet el Maqatar would be. Many times, cities near another later city could have been called the name of the modern city they are near.In the USA , almost all towns within dozens of miles of a large one are called by the large city. Ive seen plane crashes 200 miles from a city being describes as crashing in that city.Ancient Israelites destroyed cities in 1550 and then left them to rot and get covered in dirt.They would surely name a long destroyed place after a nearby modern city name ven if it was miles away.I dont have 100% confidence that every last city we think is a certain location today was the actual site then(1550) even if it was based on the legit Iron Age site(post 1200)and placename.Hence, we didnt find nor did we excavate the correct site.Plus we havnt exactly uncovered and found all there is to be found in the sites we have correctly found and properly excavated.A genuine issueis the problem of big cities like Damascus, Jerusalem, and Lebanese cities being heavily occupied and expanded today.No possible excavations in many areas.And ancient capitals are the absolute best places to form conventional historical views based on the abundant archaeological treasures left by the bulk of a given cultures population which may be spread (too)thin outside the citadels. A genuine shame and a tremendous problem.We also dont know if every area (mentioned in say Joshua) had a significant population even if we know the exact site today.Maybe the site had a big Iron Age population but a small Bronze Age population, even in the heavily populated MBA before the archaeologically proven Conquest.However, I will take your cities 1 by 1.I will skip on the last 2 groups , which include towns represented by sites we think werent found yet (though maybe we have, but not been able to properly I.D. them)and sites we think were Joshua towns that werent dug up yet.They can be left alone.I also do admit that I got perhaps slightly ahead of myself in saying "every town" has been found to have been destroyed in the MBA. It was more of an exageration describing the overall condition of the highland Palestinian land at the end of the MBA Conquest.Point duely noted. First of all, Joshua 12 CLEARLY says that Joshua did NOT burn these cities. Only 3 cities were burned by Joshua's instructions (that is not to say that later mobs of Israelites did not burn anything). Jericho, Ai , and Hazor.2 have been found and the evidence matches.Infact it matches beyond belief right down to the exact week of the year , way the massive fortifications fell , unprecidented burning of grain ( $money$ of the ancient world), and more.The Bible simply states that the populations were killed.The only real way to test the Biblical text is to see if there was a large population reduction of the MBA Canaanites at the end of the MBA, and if there was a general trend of sites discontinuing at that exact time.We need to see if a semi nomadic group living in tents replaced the MBA Canaanite culture.The Bible simply describes a much smaller population of Israelites killing off the larger population of Canaanites.The Bible depicts the Israelites during the time of the Judges following the Conquest as subservient to the surrounding nations and living in tents (Jgs 20:8; 1 Sm 4:10, 13:2).We may not know what the exact sites were since they should have been abandoned and replaced by a pastoral community (the Israelites).That is the test with reagrds to the Biblical accuracy.And we all need to be willing to accept what the evidence dictates.The Biblical chronology places the Conquest in c.1550 BCE.There is no hiding from the archaeological data.Including critically read ancient textual data.Back to the destruction issue, where we saw the only 3 cities were burnt and destroyed by Joshua's direct command, we therefor cant expect all, or even most,of the sites to have been burnt down even if we can find their EXACT location PLUS excavate them properly from top to bottom (takes anywhere from decades to "800 years") if we are fortunate enough to have no modern cities over the ruins.However we do know that wars are nasty and mobs do start fires and do other things so SOME evidence of widespread destruction all at the same time will need to be found.Jerusalem was described in Judges 1 as being conquered in part by a tribe, but Im sure it wasnt the main citadel.The was even some burning perhaps.Joshua doesnt describe any burning of buildings but Judges chapter 1 indicates some level of burning later.According to the Bible's history,Canaanite Jerusalem clearly held its head above water and survived despite the Israelites attack.Many Canaanite cities remained (well about 10% of the highland areas did)though much reduced in population and fortifications.Judges clearly makes that clear.The Bibles concise textual data can lead to a slightly different picture from book to book depending on the focus of each ones respective emphesis.Hazor managed to survive too.Though it was defeated and even burnt down by the Israelites in Joshua,some of the Canaanites remained as clearly seen in Judges.Your first city Jerusalem isnt one that can be excavated much today. But Finkelstein says the population was much reduced in the post MBA. T. el-Rumeideh is a question but el-Khalil was destroyed at the end of the MBA period. Jarmuth (3rd city) was based on the name of a Byzantine village.That was the basis. Anchor Bible DictionaryTirzah"The MB gate and stratum 5 show burn destruction, which may be attributed to the raids into Canaan by the Egyptians in their expulsion of the Hyksos"Impossible! Ahmose was in the Late Bronze Age and didnt go anyway near there! And didnt claim to! Its a modern invention of historians with falsified archaeological evidence to teh contrary and no basis PERIOD. Lachish (5th) was destroyed by Joshua at the end of the MBA.Tel ed-DuweirAnchor Bible Dictionary.
"The palace was destroyed by a severe fire which marks the end of the MBA city" Eglon(6th city) is a mess of possible sites. Gezer wasnt burned down according to the Bible (in the 1550 Conquest though an Egyptian king did so much later according to Kings, nothing to do with here).Ancho Bible dictionary says."The MB city was brought to an end by a destruction that left 3 feet or more of burned bricks in every field investigated...Imported Monochrome and local Bi-chrome, as well as other transitional MB-LB pottery suggest a date as late as possible for this destruction."Thutmose III MAY have destroyed it.Im not quite sure what exactly is supposed to be "MB-LB transitional pottery" (sounds like a reworking of the "LB lag in Palestine" to justify a little stretching while only MB pottery is present)and it is said Thutmose III claims to have destroyed it.That may however just be his mentioning it in a campaign, not exactly having destoyed it.Bi-Chrome ware is diagnostic of the LBA in significant quantities , it was imported by Cyprus. This local Bi-Chrome ware could explain the large quantities whil still being purely MBA.Monochrome ware is MBA,right? I guess it depends on features.Regardless, 1450 is closer to the end of the LBA so "transitional MBA-LBA pottery" may not be so elastic to reach 1450-1460.At least they admit Ahmose didnt do it by their silence. Debir( Tell Beit Mirsam) was destroyed at the end of the MBA. Like many other cities , it gets selected uncritically due to having pottery that fits an early Iron Age settlement.It was a city near Jerusalem that was mentioned a few times in the Bible, including the Conquest.Im not so sure its the city, infact I would doubt it highly.There would be lots of suberbs and slightly further out cities near one of the most urban centers of the hill country (Canaanite and later Israelite) Bethel (10th) is tricky.The general assumption is that it is Beitin and that has destruction at the end of the MBA.I dont think that is the site though the destruction would suit my argument.El Bireh could be the site but it is heavily occupied today and nothing (or little)is known about its history Aphek(10th)unknown location by archaeologists,multiple site suggestions. Achsaph (11th) not located but historians like to say Thutmose III claimed to have destroyed it (perhaps just listed it as collecting tribute while passing by).So It isnt Just the Bible that says it was around in this period. Megiddo was destroyed during 1550 accoring to Halpern and later around 1450 by Thutmose III.The Bible doesnt claim to have burnt this town but since so many other Palestinian sites were laid waste by an "invisible" entity in 1550 BCE , we dont need to jump to any huge conclusions to trust the Biblical record, whcih says that a population was defeated here in 1550. The Anchor Bible Dictionary article author says it was partially abandoned during the Thutmose III battle against Megiddo.I didnt see much pottery discussion there though.I almost feel an obligation to be skeptical whenever I hear anything about so called Egyptian destructions in the LBA.Or small population movements during a single battle.Clearly "small" details so closely "discovered" come about from pre assumptions and knowing what to look for.That fine.The logic is solid but I wish the pottery discussions were deeper. Kedesh (13th) Tell Qedesh has pottery from many periods including MBA.Yet again , we have cities from c1550 that existed when the Bible said they did. Jokneam (14th) had thick fortification walls till the end of the MBA , but the LBA site which they CLAIM was "apparently a peaceful transition" has no walls and the walls of the MBA are mostly worn away or something like that.There is no burn destruction but the Bible didnt say there was. They jumped all over this one.The location they think was the Joshua town was a port town from the 15th century.I dont think it was the site.I seem to have found conclicting details however.Mazar said this city had hugh fortifications in the MBA.A different site I suppose than what the Anchor Bible dictionry mentioned.Here is the Mazar quote.Mazar says in Archaeology Of The Land Of The Bible (p 198-208)"During the 18th and 17th centuryies BCE the art of fortifications reached a level of unparalled sophistiction.Tremendous efforts were invested by the MBA urban communities to defend their cities...The idea was to surround the city with steep artifical slopes which will raise the level of the city wall high above the surrounding area..""In MBIIB they became a common feature at new urban centers..... such as Hazor (the Lower City), Dan, Kabri , Tel Mevorakh , Dor ,Shechem , Tel Batash (Timnah), Ashkelon, Tel Masos (in the northen Negev).So, we seem to have perhaps further evidence that we have some confusion of sites.Some Anchor Bible Dictionary articles are rather weak.I need to get that multi volume (palestinian)Archaeology Encyclopedia set (expensive though). I had the chance to get an older one for real cheap and blew it.All the major cities mentioned in Joshua had occupation and destruction (or abandonment) at the end of MBA.Jericho had walls fall exactly at the end of the MBA. Kenyon said an earthquake caused it. (I was going to put it in my other post, the quote).Jericho, Bethel , Debir ,Lachish , Gibeon , Hebron , Arad , Hazor, plus Shiloh and Shechem all were burnt or abandoned.Not to mention many other sites not mentioned like Dan In addition to all the oens you asked me about above.I simply refuse to believe that an original c600 BCE writting could have made so many "perfect guesses" about towns existing 1000 years earlier and at the EXACT same time a complete destruction happened to the population in the highland Palestine (and somewhat in other areas as well)both in (archaeologically proven)history and scripture.My skeptical heart and common horse sense kicks into overdrive when I hear excuses that explain away the massive evidence.Even William Dever said most Palestinian cities (refering to the hill country where few were interested in,especially Egypt) ended in destruction at the end of the MBA.he said it while discussing Hazor. Hazor is quite a story in and of itself.The destructions there during multiple periods , including 2 from 1300-1550 BCE, give powerful testimony to the Bibles precise detail's that match history 100%.A perfect guess on the part of the Biblical writers from 1000 years later? in not 1 but 2 battles seperate by 230 years (Bibles exact year seperation tough there could be chronological gaps and even longer seperation)?Please.Even of the few fragments of text we found in the destruction gave the Hazor Kings name.IBNI which is Cuneiform for Yabin.There was that in the destruction plus Mari tablets on the Middle Euphraties have mention of a King IBNI from the 18th century.The question isnt so much whether the Bibles Conquest happened but what were the exact details and how many more discoveries, to supplement the already crystal clear evidence, will illuminate the picture even further.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.

You`re doing fine, Nim. Now you`ve got the hang of the quote boxes, your replies will be much clearer. If you could lay out the archaeological evidence for ISRAELITE destruction during the 'Conquest' in your own words, that would be a good starting point.

The point of my post was to highlight that "this Read any good archaeology dictionary on Palestine.All the cities are located and described as destroyed in 1550 BCE (except Ai, which could be a number of small sites aside from Et Tell)." statement is false.You claim that ALL cities are located and described as destroyed in 1550, but you have provided evidence that falsifies this statement.For example, you do not have a destruction level at Ai, even if it isn't at Et-tell (which is almost certainly is)you still don't have an alternate site, so your claim is blatantly wrong. But the towns that you have found do not provide an end to the local material culture.You have also went from ALL cities showing evidence of destruction to just two, and even those are ambiguous. This is a common 'apologetic' for the lack of evidence to support the conquest, and it is an invalid excuse.The Book of Joshua claims that the Israelites killed all the inhabitants of many cities, so we should expect to find a gap in the material culture of these cities, a gap we do not have. You do not have a 1550 destruction of Ai, you keep saying this despite knowing there is no evidence of a settlement at Ai, be it Et- tell or anywhere else. And the evidence to support this is what exactly? What happened to the 600 000 men of fighting age that left Egypt, they would be more than a match for any army. How could this happen if Joshua had killed all the local populations? The Biblical chronology places the conquest about 1400, the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 suggests a 1446 Exodus. Which contradicts the Joshua account. At that time Joshua turned back and captured Hazor and put its king to the sword. (Hazor had been the head of all these kingdoms.) Everyone in it they put to the sword. They totally destroyed them, not sparing anything that breathed, and he burned up Hazor itself. How could Hazor survive if eveyone in it had been put toi the sword and the town razed to the ground?I think it would be easier to focus on one or two towns at a time, posting reams isnt ideal.Brian.Edited by Brian, : formatting errors

I said the Bible only told of 3 destructions.The archaeological evidence for destructions in archaeology of MBA Canaanite cities is just unreal.My "apolegtic", as you call it, is in defence of the archaeological data.Your talk of no change of culture is at odds with quite a bit, infact pretty much all evidence.90% of the sites were abandoned!How is that you can ask/say "so we should expect to find a gap in the material culture of these cities, a gap we do not have."?Finkelstein already anwsered this.90% of the sites were abandoned and the others were much reduced.The culture changed so much that the land went from sedentary to nomadic.Just like the Bible says!Whats all the fuss about?The citadel of Hazor and all the citizens located THERE were destroyed. You try and survive such an inferno that destroyed it. Nobody can!You kill everybody in New York City and there will still be New Yorkers left.No just upstate either.As for Ai.There are many possible sites.And at least one shows abandonment at the end of the MBA.You are simply swimming up a cliff.MBA Palestine had change that was simply unreal.The 480 years is just one spot in the c100 AD Mesorah but the 300BCE Septuagint says 440.Paul says 573.The Bibles chronology puts it higher yet.Plus, the description is clearly MBA , which is 1550 which is what the Bibles chronology says.Editn the main point fo your post.You missed my point then.I made it clear that I meant to say that almost every MAJOR city was destroyed in the archaeological record.I have made that clear since over a day ago at least.Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.

No match for the pharoah`s army, apparently (nudge,nudge,wink, wink). Maybe all that manna-munching gave them cohones?

What was Callaway doing at Et-tell then?Ah, so if one site shows abandonment at the end of MBA that HAS to be Ai?Brian.

Most cities were destroyed at the end of MBA.That is a majority.The vast vast majority of citys had no (visible to archaeology)population at the end of the thriving period.Ai does mention burn destruction , so you are correct that it would most likley need to show up in the archaeological record.Still, since most cities were destroyed (Im not taking the Bible here , the Bible just said the bulk of the population would be destoyed)at the end of MBA, then the basic math suggestes that a burnt city in the area can be found.Especially when you have more than 1 candidate.I have a feeling that et-Tell , "600,000" , and "480 years" will be a sticking theme you wont break away from, huh?Anyway, lets get away from the Bible.You have decided that you need not 99% proof but 110%.In your archaeologically trained opinion, what was behond the situation that played itself out during and up to the end of the MBA in Palestine? Especially in the highlands here there was some sort of violent destruction event happening everywhere all at once.Also, please shed some light on the variety of sites destroyed at the end of the period. How many of the sites destroyed at the end of the MBA were once or are now I.D.ed as Biblical sites (nobody ever thought too much of the connection of course)?Look forward to hearing from you.

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.

For any lurkers who may be experiencing difficulty following the thread:Early Bronze Age (EBA)--3500-2200 BCE
Intermediate Bronze Age (IBA)--2200-2000 BCE
Middle Bronze Age (MBA)--2000-1550 BCE
Late Bronze Age (LBA)--1550-1150 BCE
Iron Age I (IAI)--1150-900 BCE
Iron Age II (IAII)--900-586 BCE
Babylonian Period--586-538 BCE
Persian Period--538-333 BCE(from the Bible Unearthed-Finkelstein-Silberman-p20)

"200,000 for all of Palestine, about 20,000 to 25,000 for the wooded hill-country"Albright estimate on the Amarna Age population.The Biblical Archaeologist
VOL XXIII No. 1Page 21.Also, Im not 100% sure we can say that exageration was the only reason behind the 600,000 numbers.Moses had tablets in Exodus (Genesis clearly was written on tablets based on obvious colophons that Cambridge Ancient History scholar Donald J. Wiseman points out)for some parts of Exodus ,but may have startd using much more perishable material like papyrus for most of Genesis-Deuteronomy.Papyrus essentially melts outside of Southern Egypt, so you have a situation of the similar words (with common roots)looking alike on damaged text plus an older for of Canaanite written in characters (or complicated syballic writtings) they may not understand very well.All the scribes would have died between Egypt and Canaan , so the younger group may not have been prepared for the Papyrus disolving plus they may have used different words that (either correctly or incorrectly), though thy understood at the time, later generations would have not know what was meant at the time.Tribal or clan leader is AL"u"F , thousand is "ALF" , the younger untrained scribes could have had 600,000 tribal leaders and thought that taking away the "Waw" (with u) would mean 600 clans, which could have been (perhaps?)as little as 4 or 5 families each which had no children (they were all young).4or5 doubled to include women makes 10.10 times 600 is 6,000.Afer making copies from 1550 BCE till around 1000 BCE, the meaning could have been lost.Now the "exaggeration" come in when you see that later redactors or scribes never corrected it back to the correct number.Not a direct exxageration exactly.In addition, numbers in the Bible clearly have symbolic meanings as opposed to literal meanings.Not saying the 600,000 did have a symblic meaning.But "40 year" periods could represent simply a long period of time that may far exceed the said 40 year or infact me somewhat shorter.The "440" years in the Septuagint and 480 in the Mesorah could clearly reflect such a period of 40 years, based on the assumed generations between the Exodus and Temple. Plus Moses and others lived in 40 year periods that totaled 120 years in many cases, so the "480 years" may have been a rough number that reflected an abreviated 4 generation geneology (from Exodus to the Temple) that some important person had at the time.Its best to take Biblical years in a round roughly correct number (except with older books like Genesis)when connecting history and assume the 40 year periods will roughly equal out when 1 +10 (over 40) is canceled out by another -10 (under 40)during the Exodus to the Temple.The 2 Hazor destructions are of immeasurable value in proving that the Bible's overall numbers.There were 410 years of Judges.Samuel like Eli could have lived to be 98 , but his Judgship isnt mentioned.We can just put it at "40 years" but maybe it was sshorter plus it overlapped with Saul.1315 plus or minus 20 years till the final destruction of Canaanite Hazor.Assuming that Solomon reigned from 970-930 BCE , then the reigns/judgships of each starts at c970-Solomon 1010-David 1050-Saul 1090-Samuel 1130-Eli 1170-Philistine opression (Samson) 1178-Abdon 1188-Elon 1195-Ibzan 1201-Jephthah 1205-Jair 1228-Tola 1268-Gideon 1275-Midian servitude 1315-Barak 1335-Hazor servitudeThe 410 years of Judges (which most overlap to form a total "480" year period from the Exodus to Conquest) prior to Eli makes 1540 for the end of the Conquest based on literal numbers but we dont know exactly how long Joshua led Israel (do we?).The battles may not have all been in a snap.Maybe the Conquest period was 40 years? From 1580 to 1540?Maybe the Exodus was around 1620 if the 40 years wandering wasnt too short a period?The best way to check that out is too see who Manetho said was the Pharoah around the general period (or end of the dynasty) when "a blast of God struck us" and then later (or at the same time) groups of the Hyksos and others invaded.The final 13th Dynasty Pharoah who Manetho mentions saw his reign end in 1620 BCE. The first wave of Hyksos invaded the Delta about 1633 and ruled till 1525.The Lybians invaded the Western Delta slghtly earlier.The 13th dynasty fled to Memphis in 1633 where Dudimose later take the reigns till 1620 when the 2nd wave of Hyksos would conquer Memphis.Some of the finest Egyptian scholars place the Ipuwur Papyrus at the end of the Middle Kingdom (dynasty 13)."...all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood."
Ipuwer 7:20"... there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt. ... and the river stank."
Ipuwer 7:21"... there is blood throughout all the land of Egypt."
Exodus 7:21ForbiddenSee a similarity there? EVEN the verses are the same LOL and this translation was before Velikovsky showed the world the similarities! (not that any scholar would fiddle with verses to make anything match)It is for this reaon that I feel the 13th dynasty was the one with the Exodus Pharoah tough it later could have been a Hyksos Pharoah , the Paypyus would make slightly less sense.However it still ould be written by an Egyptian but scholars have said that the ligguistic features in Ipuwer are only rarely attested after the Middle Kingdom.Manetho also lend evidence to the 13th dynasty Exodus though the Pharoah he mentioned was in power slightly after the Hyksos took the Delta it seems.EDIT: correction, this website seems to have mixed in Exodus with Ipuwer.I though soething looked strange.Websites irk me like crazy. The Papyrus only mentions blood in the iver from chapters 2-32:5-6 "Plague is throughout the land. Blood is everywhere."
2:10 "The River is blood" (this website doesnt mention this verse)
3:10-13 "That is our water! That is our happiness! What shall we do in respect thereof? All is ruin."Screw sloppy websites! (just Ipuwer chapter 7 has some mix ups, the so called 7:20 and 7:21)Edited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : Had to correct myself for quoting a sloppy websiteEdited by MightyPlaceNimrod, : No reason given.

Hi, Nim, want to have a stab at what language God/Moses used to write the tablets?

God would have only written somehwere around Genesis 1:1- 2:4 , plus some sort of details regarding the law at Sinai.I think God wrote (clearly in some language that is no longer extant)the words that have been translated in todays Genesis 1:3-2:4.The first tablet would end at 2:4 as that has a very obvious colophon. Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 may have have been later titles that Adam's early descendents added to a later tablet (after early ones broke , or an update post Babel that maybe only a few scribes knew after the Babel event), or it was title note they chistled into the top of the first tablet.Genesis 1:1-1:2, and infact almost all of Genesis 1-11 are translations on top of translations.The first language used wouldnt be extant anymore.One of the later language's used could have been North-East Semitic (like Akkadian),North Semitic (the Ebla language) or possibly some other language from Ur, or a language that Abraham spoke that was similar to the first Semitic language after Babel (c. 4000 BCE , which would split into all other Semitic langauges and also mix up into parts of others like Egyptian).The reason the Genesis 1:1-1:2 text (added in by Adams descendents, not part of Gods first writting) was clearly an ancient (and not as modern as say 1000 BCE) addition is because peoples from around the world would mistake it into saying that there were primeval waters before the Earth was formed (the reason for such worldwide pagan texts believing such was just a misunderstanding of early Genesis writtings).All Genesis 1:1-1:2 was saying is that the earth wasnt formed yet when the verses in our 1:3-2:4 started. It is saying that there was an empty abyss (space like Job 26:7 mentions) and then the big light explosion of 1:3 ("day" 1)would start the process that would form the earth somewhere between "day" 1 and "day" 2 when the atmosphere ("firmament")bears witness to the earth having come into existence.Genesis isnt elaborate, infact it is overly concise. All ancient peoples knew light came from the sun.The sun also formed around the time of "day" 1 and "day" 2. Later verses in Genesis were simply telling of the sun being used by plants for energy.Plus the words (Akkadian? , Sumerian?) used by post Babel (nothing to do with Babylon, the Genesis 11 "Babel" event was long before babylon existed)Bible writters (editors) would have been very imperfect "pagan" words not related to the langauge words were written in before.Genesis chapter 1 to (as far as)chapter 11 would thousands of years ago been bad translations of an early supeior worded text no longer understood.Ancient pagan and modern misunderstandings (Christian , Jewish , pagan , or secular) have little testimony that can be laid on the back of the Genesis text.Im sure that it got converted into a lighter medium of transport by Moses time (Papyrus), and the tablets would have no longer been used.Now, the Exodus-Deuteronomy writtings.Moses would have written in a Amorite/Canaanite type of language.The tablets God sent him would have been in a language he understood , but we dont know what exactly was written on them.Something very concise Im sure.Also, I made a mistake in my last post.The vowel letters didnt come into use till around the 8th century before our era , according to modern scholars.So the consonants for "1000" and "clan leader" could very well have been the EXACT SAME spelling then as they are now.I can refer you to books (both secular and Christian authors) that tell of all the worldwide "creation", flood, and "Babel" myths from cultures of antiquity. This isnt just a Bible issue, and for God's sake dont say it is some "Ancient Near eastern issue"! Genesis 1-11 is a universal story and all the ancient myths virtually compete against each other to scream the loudest against the modern "Its a Mesopotamian myth" claim.We arent exactly on topic though.Im waiting for Brian to come back with a vengance on the Conquest issue (lol).Ill agree to a time out on the Conquest , because I want to read all the older posts here on that and other issues.I dont feel like I have all the anwsers on a c.1550 Conquest with regards to a claim of "100% accuracy in Joshua-Judges" . The modern site reconized as Gideon (where the Canaanites made a treaty with Israel and avoided destruction)is el-Jib and that doesnt have many Middle Bronze and Late Bronze archaeological artifacts, infact almost none.If there was a significant Canaanite population there, then that el-Jib site couldnt be the same site the Bible discusses.There hasnt been any real research to support a c1550 Conquest though. You can only find a "Conquest" model for 1400 and for 1200 complete with fully developed scholarship.I cant look anything up and find any effort at all to support 1550.I can only find evidence scattered in books and dictionaries that have no idea that a c.1550 Conquest is even on the table.There just isnt any c1550 Conquest BlueBook out there.The 1200 model is finally dieing a much deserved death.Despite volumes on top of volumes supporting such a date.Christians are becoming more involved in the issue , but are getting sucked into a 1400 date for Conquest.Bible and Spade is the perfect example.Even worse! (not that you can get much worse than a c1200 Conquest)The only thing better about c1410 is that it gets closer to the c1550 date that the evidence strongly suggests. Even 1550 isnt without its problems , the biggest problem is that no effort has been made to collect all the scraps of evidence for such a date.The bottom has fallen out for c1200 (though many seminaries and Christian schools churn out students stuck on a 1250 Exodus)with ragards to the evidence, but many fundamentalist hard-heads will have a hard time getting past the 1410 date for Conquest due to the "480" years in the c100 AD Hebrew text in 1 Kings 6.Im not trying to sound like a know it all , but old theories must die.Secular scholars and academics have attributed the falsification of the 1200&1400 Conquest model to represent a falsified Joshua-Judges , but the price to pay could be an innacurate and imcomplete past written in our modern works that cover our ancient histories.We need to find an accurate historical model first then argue about theological implications later.A agree that fundamentalist hard-heads and their "1410" date wont help much.But all the avaliabe evidence out there stongly supports Genesis 12-rest of Bible as generally accurate at least.