encountered a Mitannian spy during the concluding phase of A1, making Aharoni’s conclusion quite believable. When Amenhotep II was passing through the Sharon Plain, a messenger of the King of Mitanni, called the “Prince of Naharin” here, was captured by the Egyptians. This messenger was carrying with him a letter in the form of a clay tablet that hung from his neck like a necklace, which undoubtedly dealt with matters that concerned the Mitanni-inspired rebellion (Ibid.). All of this demonstrates the great importance of this vassal-rebellion, both to Egypt and to Mitanni, as Mitanni was seeking to usurp Egypt’s stranglehold on the prestigious position of the ANE’s dominant super-power. In contrast to all of this international intrigue revolving around A1, A2 was far less significant on an international level and far less illustrious, as will be seen momentarily. 109. Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, The Macmillan Atlas, 34. 110. Grimal, History of Ancient Egypt, 219. 111. Pritchard, ANET, 246. 112. Examples of campaigns launched in spring are plentiful: (1) Thutmose III’s first Asiatic campaign, as he arrived at his first destination (the border fortress of Tjel) on ca. 20 April 1484 BC; (2) Amenhotep II’s first Asiatic campaign, as he arrived at his first destination (Shamash-Edom) on ca. 15 May 1452 BC; (3) Raamses II and his battalions of infantry and squads of chariotry, who departed for Kadesh in late April of ca. 1274 BC (Kenneth A. Kitchen, Pharaoh Triumphant: The Life and Times of Ramesses II [Warminster, Eng.: Aris & Phillips, 1982], 53); (4) Nabopolassar’s expedition against mountain tribes in the month of Sivan, or ca. May/June of 607 BC (D. J. Wiseman, Chronicles of the Chaldean Kings [London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1961], 65); and (5) Nebuchadnezzar’s expedition to Syria in Sivan of the first full year of his reign, or ca. 604 BC (Ibid., 28, 69). 113. Der Manuelian, Amenophis II, 59. As proven above, “seventh year” should be corrected to “third year.” 114. Vandersleyen, L’Egypte, vol. 2, 321. 115. Ibid., 324–325. 116. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 163. 117. Ibid., 164. 118. Ibid. 119. Ibid., 165. 120. Ibid., 164. 121. John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible (Nashville: Word, 1997), 198. 122. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 408. 123. A notable exception to this trend is the Hyksos, the western Asiatics who overtook Egypt and controlled her commerce. The Royal Turin Canon, a papyrus that derives from Ramesside times and reflects a kinglist that was begun during the Middle Kingdom, fixes a 108-year rule (ca. 1668 to 1560 BC) for the Hyksos (Ibid., 107), who were driven out by the native Egyptians of the 17th Dynasty. Yet such documentation about the Hyksos is warranted, as they played a prominent role in Egyptian history, having produced pharaohs who ruled in place of the native Egyptians. Moreover, when Moses wrote that the Egyptians feared the possibility that the Hebrews “will multiply, and in the event of war, they will also join themselves to those who hate us, and fight against us and depart from the land” (Exod 1:10), he probably was referring to the Hyksos, who just beforehand had retreated to southern Canaan after their expulsion. 124. Kitchen, Reliability of the OT, 11. The Biblical text to which Kitchen alludes is 2 Chr 14:9–15. 125. Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, The Macmillan Atlas, 34. 126. Hallo and Simpson, Ancient Near East, 262. 127. Grimal, History of Ancient Egypt, 218. 128. Breasted, Ancient Records, vol. 2, 310. 129. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel, 408. 130. Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22; Pritchard, ANET, 247. 131. Pritchard laments, “Even though two of the figures give questionable readings, no clear alternatives will supply the total given on the stele” (Pritchard, ANET, 247). Although Pritchard does not elaborate, the “questionable readings” most likely are the 36,300 Kharu and the 30,652 family members of the Nagasuites/Neges. But since this part of the stele shows no sign of damage or repair, there is no reason to doubt these numbers. 132. “The total given, 89,600, is actually wrong, the correct total being 101,128!” (Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22). 133. Ibid., 21; Pritchard, ANET, 239, 246; Hoffmeier, “The Annals of Thutmose III,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 12. These are the only campaigns of Thutmose III that list the amount of captives taken. 134. As Shea notes, “While some have questioned the very high number given here, if one looks at the needs for state labor right after the exodus, the number does not look so high after all” (Shea, “Amenhotep II as Pharaoh,” 47). 135. Ibid.; Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22. The Prince of Shanhar, or Biblical Shinar, is to be equated with the King of Babylon (Pritchard, ANET, 247). 136. Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22. 137. Barry J. Beitzel, “Habiru,” in ISBE, vol. 2, 588, 589. 138. Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22. SA.GAZ, the Sumerian logographic equivalent of Habiru, and its variants are found in cuneiform texts from ca. 2500 BC to the 11th century BC. In light of this early attestation, many are unwilling to associate the Apiru of the 15th century BC with the Hebrews. However, Abram was known as a Hebrew in the 21st century BC (Gen 14:13), so the solution to the dilemma is that the two non-guttural consonants found in the triconsonantal root of ‘bri, the exact consonants that appear in Akkadian and Ugaritic (br, possibly meaning “cross over, go beyond”), are also found in “Eber” (Gen 10:21), the ancestor of Abram from whom the word undoubtedly derives. Thus Abram is one of numerous Eberite peoples, all of whom are known as Habiru due to their retention of Eber’s ancient namesake (R. F. Youngblood, “Amarna Tablets,” in ISBE, vol. 1 [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979], 108; Barry J. Beitzel, “Hebrew (People),” in ISBE, vol. 2, 657). 139. Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22. 140. Pritchard, ANET, 247. 141. Bryant G. Wood, “One Thousand Years Missing from Biblical History? A Review of a New Theory,” Bible and Spade 6:4 (Aut 1993), 98. 142. Grimal, History of Ancient Egypt, 219. 143. Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, The Macmillan Atlas, 34. 144. Hoffmeier, Israel in Egypt, 124. 145. Hoffmeier, “Memphis and Karnak Stelae,” in Context of Scripture, vol. 2, 22. 146. Yigael Yadin, Hazor: The Head of all those Kingdoms, The 1970 Schweich Lectures of the British Academy (London: Oxford University Press, 1972), 7–8. 147. Ibid., 8. 148. Amarna Letters, ed. and trans. Moran, 290, with modifications according to Yadin, Hazor: The Head, 8. 149. Ibid., 235, with modifications according to Yadin, Hazor: The Head, 8. 150. For a fuller treatment of the destructions of Hazor described in Joshua
So You Want To Be An Archaeologist?
Accepted location of Syria as the site of the rebellion is in stark contrast to the opinion of Vandersleyen, who states that “the first campaign
- ▼ 三月 (6)