Here’s a basic outline (along with some additional info not included in the video). I hope I got most of it right. Ahmose I conquers Avaris: about 1537 BC (about 60 years prior to Thutmose II’s death per this video) or 1520 BC (per The Ark of the Covenant in its Egyptian Context). Egypt then wants little to do with the outside world for a while and generally doesn’t let Semitic Asiatics in. 1477 BC: Thutmose II dies. Thutmose III (heir apparent) is two years old. Hatshepsut becomes pharaoh and, during her reign, puts Thutmose III in the army in hopes that he becomes a KIA. 1456 BC: Hatshepsut dies and Thutmose III comes back as pharaoh. He realizes he likes military expeditions more than court life. During his reign, he brings Nubia and Canaan into Egypt’s hegemonic sphere, and the incoming money from these places makes Egyptian stuff cheaper. He also engages in war with the Mitanni. 1444-1443 BC: Amenhotep II is born. (Smile, any early daters reading this. I included this just because I care about you. Also, the “older brother defense” for the tenth plague wouldn’t work for him as his older brother Amenemhat died before he was born) 1425 BC: Amenhotep II becomes pharaoh as a co-regent with his father, who would die two years later. 1416 BC: Amenhotep II has a peace treaty with his Mitanni. 1323 BC: Tutankhamun dies. His widow writes to the Hittite king asking if he can send one of his sons to marry her and become pharaoh. However, the Hittite prince is murdered en route and Ay usurps the Egyptian throne. 1319 BC: Horemheb becomes pharaoh after Ay’s death. During his reign, he names a guy as his successor. 1305 BC: The successor becomes pharaoh as Rameses I. He proceeds to reign for about five minutes. He already had grandkids when named as Horemheb’s successor. 1303 BC: His son Seti becomes pharaoh and undoes some of the losses Horemheb suffered. 1288 BC: Rameses II becomes pharaoh. He moves the Egyptian capital to this new city of Pi-Rameses (named after himself) on an island because he didn’t like the priests in Thebes. He still needs them so he builds some religious architecture. His son Amon-her-khepeshef is also born around this time. 1283 BC: Rameses II has his first military conflict against the Hittites. Technically a tie, but good enough for him to say he won. The Sea People set up shop in the coastal plain of Canaan around this time without his knowledge. 1270 BC: Rameses II’s last Levantine campaign. 1267 BC: Peace treaty between Egypt and the Hittites. Little is known about what was happening in Egypt during the rest of his reign after this. 1263 BC: Crown Prince Amon-her-khepeshef (had some additional government roles) and vizier Pasir die. The Semitic city of Avaris (where the Israelites lived while in Egypt) is also abandoned. 1222 BC: Merneptah (I’m guessing this means “Beloved of Ptah”) becomes pharaoh as an old man. He was the 13th son of his father. (The Israelites under Joshua’s leadership began the conquest of Canaan the preceding year after Moses’s death.) 1218 BC: Merneptah goes to quash a rebellion by Gezer and encounters the Israelites. He makes a note of this in the Merneptah stele the following year. 1217 BC: Libyans invade Egypt and get disturbingly far in. It takes 3 months to drive them out. The pharaoh seems not to have had chariots. 1212 BC: Merenptah dies. The throne is usurped by Amun-meses (I’m guessing this means “Amun has borne him”) 1209 BC: Merenptah’s heir Seti II manages to retake the throne. Not much of interest is known to have happened in the remainder of his reign. 1203 BC: Siptah (probably “Son of Ptah”) becomes pharaoh at 9 and is physically disabled. He was controlled by his court and regent. 1196 BC: Tawosret (regent for Siptah) becomes pharaoh. Her father was Merenptah and her husband was Seti II. Her reign ends in civil war against the next pharaoh. 1194 BC: Sethnakht becomes pharaoh and starts the 20th dynasty. He spends a lot of time legitimizing his reign. (This might also be close to the time that Joshua died.) 1191 BC: Rameses III becomes pharaoh. He builds stuff and is also the first pharaoh to do something about the sea people. Late in his reign, inflation reigned supreme and he stops campaigning to bring in more stuff. He eventually gets assassinated. 1160 BC: Rameses IV becomes pharaoh, but Egypt’s hegemony over Canaan and Nubia is already gone. Inflation was out of control, and Egypt had lost its inflation cushions and wasn’t strong enough to take them back.
Wouldn't these massive building projects have been a cause of inflation? Instead of producing goods and food the workers were building nonproductive structures. Instead of the army gathering loot by conquering foreign cities they stood around guarding corvée laborers.
Not necessarily. Building projects were often worked on during the Inundation period when food production was impossible--this is when corvée labour might have been used. And there were craftsmen who specialized in the construction of monuments, so there was a limit to the corvée labour involved. However, this would have certainly been true if the projects were big enough and their cost could not be offset by what was coming in from the hegemony.
Was Moses really 40 when he murdered the Egyptian and fled to Midian or might he actually have been a teenager/young adult? Here's what the passage says: "Many years later, when Moses had grown up, he went out to visit his own people, the Hebrews, and he saw how hard they were forced to work. During his visit, he saw an Egyptian beating one of his fellow Hebrews. After looking in all directions to make sure no one was watching, Moses killed the Egyptian and hid the body in the sand. The next day, when Moses went out to visit his people again, he saw two Hebrew men fighting. “Why are you beating up your friend?” Moses said to the one who had started the fight. The man replied, “Who appointed you to be our prince and judge? Are you going to kill me as you killed that Egyptian yesterday?” Then Moses was afraid, thinking, “Everyone knows what I did.” And sure enough, Pharaoh heard what had happened, and he tried to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and went to live in the land of Midian. When Moses arrived in Midian, he sat down beside a well." Exodus 2: 11-15 It doesn't exactly lay out any specifics but based on the little bit of what we are told on how he behaves towards committing the murder, the other Hebrews accusing him, and Pharaoh ordering him killed; it doesn't exactly reflect that of someone with the emotional maturity of a 40 year old.
Is there a good source pinpointing when the area of former Avaris became a cemetery? I remember reading something along the lines of "by Ramesside times the area had become a cemetery" but not sure if there is more specific analysis.
I would refer you to the works of Bietak and his colleagues. Unfortunately, we cannot narrow it down any closer than mid-Dynasty 19 because of agricultural levelling. There is the foundation of a palace of Horemheb that has been found followed by the fragments of Dynasty 19 burials. And we only have the fragments of those burials because agricultural activity has chewed up most of the tombs that were there.
Under Chattel slavery, a slave has no rights to life, liberty, or property ownership. It is the concept of complete ownership. The slave owner under a chattel system has rights to take a slave's life or deprive the slave of any property. Slaves in the Bible could not be killed and had to be set free if disabled. Slaves in the Bible could also own property. Even though a slave was the property of his owner, he could also acquire property of his own.
Why is the early TIP (at least, D21) not considered a continuation of the New Kingdom? Smendes succeeds Ramses XI, but is it considered an intermediate period because Upper Egypt is not secure / ruled by HPAs? I suppose on some level the definitions are convention, derived from Manetho, etc. Also generally NK pharaohs are buried in the Valley at Thebes, which obviously stops at D20.
The reason is because Smendes was only king over Upper Egypt in name alone. Smendes really only ruled over Lower Egypt. After the wehem-mesut of Ramesses XI, rule over Egypt was divided: Lower Egypt was ruled by the crown prince Smendes, while Upper Egypt was ruled by Herihor, High Priest of Amun-Re. That division of authority remained after the death of Ramesses XI.
With the Egyptian army apparently in need of chariots as the main thrust of their war machine would the emphasis in kings on Solomon's horses stables and chariots showing his wealth have been an Egyptian influence or does the borrowing from Egypt in the bible end with exodus? Thanks for informing us all.
@@ancientegyptandthebible He’s currently working on a video centered around Bronze Age Bible Archaeology, I just think it’s not a bad idea to get some guidance from you along the way
@@Kakaragi > He’s currently working on a video centered around Bronze Age Bible Archaeology, I just think it’s not a bad idea to get some guidance from you along the way I have no problem working with him (or most people), and you might suggest it to him. I just don't impose myself on other people's channels.
There are actually two capitals: an administrative capital and an imperial capital. The administrative capital was at Memphis and didn't move from Memphis--this was where the bureaucracy resided and did most of their work. The imperial capital was relocatable and was where the king decided to establish it. At the time of Seti I, the imperial capital was at Thebes.
@@ancientegyptandthebible Good to know, thank you. Did Moses ever live in Thebes then or are the references to "pharao(h)" when Moses was living in Egypt just retrogression references to the then Governor of Lower Egypt who later became Rameses I?
@@marinanguish9928 > Did Moses ever live in Thebes then or are the references to "pharao(h)" when Moses was living in Egypt No, to our knowledge, Moses never lived in Thebes. > ... just retrogression references to the then Governor of Lower Egypt who later became Rameses I? Yes, they are retrojective references.
I think this idea has a lot of problems. (1) Hatshepsut lived in Thebes and Moses's parents lived in Avaris hundreds of miles away. There is no physical propinquity where such an adoption would have taken place. (2) At no point would Hatshepsut have had the opportunity to adopt Moses. As daughter of the king, she would have been prohibited from adopting a child. And as king, she would have had no incentive to adopt a child she was trying to kill--she would have been both adopter and murderer. After all, Moses was being adopted off because the king of Egypt was trying to kill all the male Semite babies. (3) If Moses had been adopted by Hatshepsut, Moses would have spent most of his early life in Thebes, far away from widespread contact with the Israelites (and Moses's biological parents). This seems incongruent with the Biblical text, which suggests that Moses had contact with his ethnic community. (4) We have evidence that Hatshepsut only ever had one daughter, Neferure. The suggestion that Hapshepsut was the adopting mother of Moses is a weak attempt by early exodus proponents to shoe-horn the adoption narrative into Egyptian history. The more likely scenario is that Moses's adopting mother was a woman who was not yet daughter of a king and was free to exercise her right to adopt. After Moses fled, his adopted mother became "daughter of the king" when her father took the throne. This situation happened historically when General Ramesses (vizier of Horemheb), who lived at Avaris and had a large family, was elevated to the throne as King Ramesses I.
Hey Dr. Falk. If I remember correctly, there was an article written by BAR that talked about an Egyptian statue found at the destruction layer at hazor associated with Ramesses II. How much was he involved with Canaan? especially with big places like Hazor or say Jericho?
@@501Mobius Under the terms of the treaty, Ramesses II received control of the cities in Canaan. These statues were sent to various cities when alliances changed. Normally, these statues were created after a treaty was established. After the treaty with the Hittites, Ramesses II probably sent many of these statues out as the allegiances of these cities changed hands. These statues (and stele) were only placed where there were functioning cities. It makes no sense to totally destroy a city and then put a statue there that no one would adore. After the treaty, his only involvement was the collection of tribute.
@@ancientegyptandthebibleOh, that would explain the motivation to place a Rameses statue there. The early Exodus date cabal would have to say the statue came in the ensuing time between when Hazor was originally destroyed, and Deborah and Barak destroyed it a second time. Of course, there would not be a reason for it to be sent there at that time.
@@501Mobius No, there wouldn't be a reason to set a statue after the city is destroyed. Early exodus fans often stretch things in order to justify what they believe. Of course, they have a serious problem justifying their placement of each destruction. Their first destruction actually dates to Thutmosis III (not Amenhotep II), Thutmosis III claims responsibility for it as his own conquest, and it is a really minor destruction layer so minor that most archaeologists do not consider it a total destruction of the city. Their second destruction cannot be dated any later than the end of the 13th century, but Deborah dates to 12th or 11th centuries. This is why Petrovich tries desperately to "re-type" the Mycenaean ware found in that destruction layer, but no one is convinced.
