Exodus Part Two: Population of the Exodus Group.

If all these Hyksos were expelled from Egypt around the end of the Middle Bronze Age or early Late Bronze Age then where is evidence of their appearance in Palestine?Actually the Palestinian population declined by about that much, not increased?Avaris was occupied by a primarily urban population.Manfred Bietak said that one could not exclude minor nomadic element in the city and especially outside it, but these were mostly urbanites.Where is the archaeological evidence of such an intrusion into Palestine of city-dwellers?James Weinstein (a minimalist) said this as a possible explanation for the Exodus narrative Tell el-Maskhuta has been proposed by many (even minimalists) as a strong candidate for Pithom.Weinstein made the point that this abandonment in the eastern delta was before the termination of Jericho in other writings.Avaris was captured in 1521 BE.There doesnt seem to be 100% clear knowledge of exactly where the Hyksos people went (I would assume they dispersed throughout Egypt in other cities) after 1521BCE. Redford seems to assume that the lack of written records showing many Asiatic slaves in the early 18th dynasty Egypt proves that the population didnt remain.I just cant see any evidence of a drastic change in material culture in Palestine in the early Late Bronze Age (1550-1500), so I exclude an intrusion of 100,000 urbanites.Perhaps the Semitic pastoralists populations that vanished around 1600 (or later) in Pithom (and perhaps some from around the region near Avaria which is close to Rameses) and other towns entered Palestine though the population of pastoralists& nomads is tough to measure archaeologically.Both in Egypt where they left and palestine where perhaps they entered.Perhaps the most visible archaeological evidence is the clearing of Pithom since the pastoralist population seems to pre-dominate.But in more urban towns, the exodus of pastoralists wouldnt leave much of a dent in the visible archaeological record.As for the urban people living in Avaris,my assumption it that the Asiatic people were largely Egyptian in many cultural ways and intermixed well.Donald Redford then mentions the devestation in Palestine at the end of the Middle Bronze Age (dated typically to end around 1550BCE), and that there isnt any written evidence to support a view among many archaeologists "....amounting almost to an unquestioned tenent of faith, that it was the Egyptian armies of Ahmose that effected this devestation".Redford adds Redford mentioned that the end of the Middle Bronze Age in Palestine could have been as late as the campaigns of Thutmose III in 1457BC.Redford mentions many destryoed towns in Palestine and also says "Transjordan was sparsely populated in MBIIB-C, but even the few sites for the most part terminate at the close of IIC".The Egyptian empire of Thutmose III never destroyed towns. William Shea and Kenneth Kitchen have made that point strongly and convincingly.Redford called the lack of evidence "maddening" Though Redford (a minimalist) didnt hold the view at the time of this book writing in the early 1990, some internet sources indicate that he has indicated a view that the Hyksos as proto-Israelites destroyed many sites in around 1500BCE and that Moses lived around the later 16th century.(more coming)But as to other mainstream archaeological views ...... Bietak later(1992 Anchor publication quoted above) joined the Ahmose-skeptics and attributes the Middle Bronze Age Palestinian destructions to 1457 campaigns of Thutmose III.George Ernest Wright fiercely rejects the Ahmose skeptics Well, if Wright shows a chart then thats good enough for most people! Heaven forbid we disagree with the honor of Albright.The conclusions of Albright, Campbell, Bright, Wright, and Dever must carry the day.Dont disagree!As for the more competent (at times) WeinsteinEven he admites that the evidence is shoddy for an Ahmose Conquest So much for evidence of military activity beyond Sharuhen.Hans Goedicke made the point that the priority of Ahmose would have been to re-establish control over Nubia.(The End Of The Hyksos in Egypt p37-47 in book title Egyptological Studies in Honor of Richard A Parker)Donald Redford has made it clear that the Egyptians were simply too weak to lay seige to large cities after fighting the Hyksos.Weinstein has tryed to make a point that there were large amounts of Hyksos scarabs in sites destroyed and thus it would indicate a justified Egyptian conquest of the natue that would be required to justify the terminal Middle Bronze Age destructions c1550.Piotr Bienkowski made a point in refutation of Weinstein That is a devestating responce.The Hyksos CLEARLY didnt control those sites, and even the ones with scarabs only indicate trade-relations of some sort.Anyway, there is some question as to when the MBA ended, but most would place the Hyksos "expulsion" back to Palestine near the start of the Late Bronze Age just after (or right during) the MBA termination.Where is the hugh population increase and material culture change that an urban population numbering in the 100,000 range would clearly demonstrate?Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.Edited by Nimrod, : No reason given.

...your stated belief tht the world was created around 5750BCE with the archaeological record.Your dates would place the flood at around 2100 BCE and the Babel event around 2000 or even later.You seem to hold to a Conquest date of around 1500 BCE.So, in 500 years , all of world history and pre-history happened in time for the exodus?

Not really.Those are 2 seperate issues.The 89,000 prisoners you mention were in a heavily populated areas which mainly included norrth-Palestine and south-Syria near Lebanon plus other places (in addition to Jezreel, Galiee,and coastal Palestine, the also included trans-Jordan and I think perhaps some in the south near Lachish though most would disagree).There were no town destructions during that campaign and Palestine alone had a sedentary population of about 200,000 at the time (later Late-Bronze Age 1)in the coastal & extreme-northern regions (Jezreel and Galiee), not to mention a hugh amount of pastoralists& semi-nomads that numbered perhaps 50,000.It could be 250,000 people total population.Infact captured included quite a large number of clearly nomadic peoples (bedouin, shashu, apiru, etc.) which were over 25,000 alone in the report I believe.Minus town destructions, the sedentary population reduction-which would have dropped from perhap 200,000 to around 150,000 during the campaign- wouldnt really be noticed.Nomadic peoples (invisible to archaeology) could have taken over empty land and houses as well and thus their newly-"visible" presence in the archaeological record would further erase whatever little could have been detected as a population reduction.NOW, what you are trying to do is compare THAT 1420BC archaeological event to the hypothetical issue (though generally accepted) of 100,000 urban Egyptians (of mainy Semitic and Hurrian extraction) traveling to ALL of Palestine and not be noticed archaeologically during the terminal Middle Bronze Age (or toward the early Late Bronze Age of roughly 1550 to 1520 between the 2).The case becomes impossible to make when the supposed migrations are claimed (as you are doing)to take 100,000 urban Egyptian's to the highland regions of Palestine where the destructions are rampant.The total sedentary population was only about 10,000 to 20,000 (though Israel Finkelstein argues that the MBA population of about 100,000 didnt reduce as much as the visible archaeological record would indicate, instead they somehow decided to become pastoralists which would become "archaeologically invisible").Finkelstein's idea has alot to be commended (though I think the "invisible" pastoralists were incoming Israelites from Egypt who had Palestinian cultural contacts and werent Egyptianized AND the majority of the sedentary highland Canaanites were driven away to other regions in part), but the hypohetical issue of 100,000 Egyptian urbanites invading(which Finkelstein and I DONT propose) would be at least a 500% visible population increase in the highland regions.It would be detected very easily.The 90% of MBA sites that discontinued would frankly be replaced pretty quick if urban Egyptians settled.Instead the situation of a 90% permanent site reduction n highland Palestine remained till about 400 years later.

First of all, the Judges period clearly covers the 400+ years (actually 600+) years that would be between the Exodus and Monarchy.There were no stories of Egyptian opression and for good reason;the Egyptians werent the Israelites (main) problem during that period but the Canaanites were.2nd, the Patriarchal period could only fit into the time-period from 2000BCE to 1650 BCE. Detail after detail ONLY fits that period and and that period alone. If I had more time, I would cover this important period. (though my posts would be drowned out by substance-free disruptors, even some who have the audacity to carry a screen name after an important patriarch)One quick detail in the patriarchal narratives is the price that Joseph was sold into slavery for.It was 20 shekels of silver(Gen 37:28).Diverse ancient Near Eastern texts show that the universal price for slaves from roughly 1900BE to 1650BCE was 20 shekels of silver.After that, the price was 30 shekels till c1300 BCE.I wanted to wait till I had time to cover the Patriarchal period, but I will present links to complete Biblical Archaeology Review debates between Kenneth Kitchen and Ronald Hendel.The only problem is that Hendel got the first and last word (multi-month articles exchanges).Which is why I wanted to wait so I could respond to Hendel plus other articles I would link.(link coming up in few days when I have time).