Who was Joseph's Pharaoh?

     When or even if, the exodus occurred is often a topic of debate and much conjecture.  Admittedly, it's tricky.  However, what makes things unnecessarily difficult is the academic establishment's disdain for the Bible, specifically, and traditional sources in general.  They've sought to create an ancient timeline independent of, and very nearly antagonistic to, the Bible.  There are many reasons why this is a really bad idea.  A really big one, is that before the 19th century, the Bible was the only source of information we really had about the ancient world.  It is the most complete and comprehensive source of information about the ancient world.  What we've obtained since hasn't been nearly as comprehensive.  We have much passed down by the Greeks, but it isn't nearly as ancient as the Bible.  Abraham, after all, came from one of the oldest known cities, Ur, in Mesopotamia.  The Bible represents an effort to restore history, and Man's relationship with the Creator, before it was corrupted by the early civilizations.  Knowing the nature of civilization, past and present, that is not a hard sell.  Archaeology, the big, relatively new, historical discipline is the problem.  It doesn't know it's place, but that is another entry.  

    At any rate, As a historian, my focus is on the narrative, sources and what makes sense in the greater context of history.  I am a great believer in taking traditional sources very seriously, if not always literally.  If we take the Bible seriously, then the key part of the story is Joseph's Dream--the Bible never names the pharaoh he serves.  During the reign of Pepy II, longest reigning pharaoh of any dynasty, there was a once in a thousand years drought event.  Possibly, it was the drought of Joseph's dreams.  It doesn't appear that  Pharaoh Pepy's rule was interrupted by it.  The dynasty ended with his reign because he lived so long that even his heirs were older than customary, and of necessity, he had delegated a great deal of authority.  The Intermediate Period that followed was more of a temporary decentralization of power than chaotic upheaval.  

    If this is the time of Joseph, which seems likely, then adding 400 years would place the Israelites exodus under Moses around the time of the Hyksos rule in Amarna.  The rule of the Hyksos is seen as a time of Egyptian humiliation.  Some folks identify the Hebrews as the Hyksos, but I am inclined to think that Hyksos rule is likely a consequence of the exodus, not the event itself.

   Also interesting, are the findings of Dr. David Rohl are intriguing and lend credence to ideas that I've been pondering for awhile.  Dr. Rohl has believes the tomb of Joseph has been found.  He also places the Hebrews in Egypt much earlier than others do.  I am inclined towards his chronology, but not necessarily his assumption that the tomb he has identified as Joseph's, is actually Joseph's.  I don't think he's outright wrong, but just that it would be very hard to prove.  To be continued.

Exodus Observations

   My efforts to discern the chronology of the Exodus has revealed a number of things. The clearest of these is the effort primarily in academia and the media (often two expressions of the same voice) to discredit the Bible as a historical source. No big surprises here. I noticed that there is a concerted effort to determine the biblical timeline without using the Bible as the principal point of reference. This is both ironic and absurd, because it is the Bible that has given us a great deal of our knowledge of the ancient world and it is, by far, the most complete and comprehensive source of information regarding the past. This approach also introduces errors and confusion--hence the many unlikely dates posited for the time of the Exodus.

   Typically, the Pharaoh of the Exodus is identified as Ramses the Great, even though the Bible never names him or any pharaoh, specifically. The story includes many details that allow us to infer who it might be, but also, we must remember that the point of the story is not to give the pharaoh publicity, but rather to God. The authorship of Exodus is also assigned to Moses. If we accept this, even in part, then we should ask why Moses would exclude that information. He knew the man personally, after all, but I think we can guess at reasons why he would for leave that name out of history, or why future editors would do the same.  

   Interestingly, the other story that is key to the chronology of the Exodus is that of Joseph, son of Jacob, and in that story the name of the pharaoh is also left out. Why? I can't say with certainty. Nevertheless, my estimation of the chronology of these stories, in historical time, is that they are very ancient, so it is reasonable to say that perhaps this knowledge was lost. However, with so much other excellent information provided, it is also reasonable to accept that it was just written that way. Again, tradition tells us that all this was passed down by Moses.

   I may cause some dismay to believers when I state that I take the Bible seriously, though not always literally. My faith in the veracity of the claims put forth also accepts that it is the spirit of the message that matters more than the minutiae. Honest human error may affect the latter, but the overall cause remains unharmed. By this measure, I put forth the first observation: Joseph and his dream. Joseph's famous dream is that of the seven fat cows and the seven skinny cows. These he interpreted to pharaoh as representing seven years of plenty followed by seven years of famine. It happens that there was a once in a thousand years drought event during the reign of Pepy II of Egypt. Pepy also happens to be the longest living and longest reigning of the pharaohs of any dynasty. He took the throne as a child and lived into his nineties! This is relevant because the Bible tells us that the pharaoh granted Joseph great and wide authority to oversee storage preparations against the coming famine.

   Pepy lived long, and when he passed, many in the presumable line of succession would have been old or dead, or further down the line than typical. An older pharaoh would also, of necessity, need to delegate much more authority to get things done. This appears to have been so much the case with Pepy that after his passing Egypt entered its first, and least severe, Intermediate Period. Egypt was ruled during this time by nomarchs--nobles and administrators who continued to operate their fiefdoms, probably much as they had under Pepy. It doesn't seem to have been a terrible time, just a period of uncertain leadership. However, it is in keeping with the ruling style of the pharaoh in the story of Joseph. If we follow the text, taking it seriously, the answer is pretty simple. 

   The Bible states that after about 400 years, a new administration, now hostile to the Jews who've resided in Goshen for centuries, takes control. It is with this backdrop that the story of the Exodus unfolds. The plagues and the release of the Hebrews, coincides with the most humiliating period for the Egyptians--the Hyksos takeover. Am I saying that the Hyksos are the Jews? No, though that is an understandable conclusion. I am saying that the Hyksos are a symptom of an Egyptian collapse--the people of the Levant (today's Palestine, Israel) moving in and taking over. The timing works with the plagues told of in the Bible and the resulting mayhem in Egypt. The Hyksos are often called the "Shepherd Kings" but there was no shortage of shepherds in that part of the world, so assuming they are Jews is unnecessary. The Jews would have left Egypt to wander the Sinai already.  

   Archaeology is much more like treasure hunting than any of the sciences. Treasure hunting requires a map, and archaeology is no different. The treasure map are traditional historical sources, like the Bible. However, once the archaeologist reaches the treasure, there is the temptation to use new discoveries to re-write history with the flimsiest of evidence. Thing is, time and time again, traditional sources show themselves to be accurate far more often than not. In our case, combined with a distorted timeline for reasons mentioned in my first paragraph, we get the conventional "wisdom" that the walls of Jericho, came down much earlier than related in the Joshua story (circa 1580 B.C.)-- many centuries earlier, in fact. The mistake, however, is theirs, not the Bible's. Those much earlier dates for the fall of Jericho's walls very nearly agree with my proposed biblically-based timeline. Considering the margin of error for dating methods, they are in virtual agreement. All that this would mean is that the period of the Judges would have lasted much longer than previously thought--that the Jews occupied the Promised Land during the Bronze Age. For example, the famous story of Deborah and Barak opposing the army of Sisera seems to be one of a confrontation with the Hittites or an allied kingdom. This could be in the mid-14th century B.C. There are references to the enemy's "chariots of iron" as a pretty big deal. It all makes sense if we take the Bible seriously.