Tuesday, 30 May 2023

From Joseph to Moses to Joshua: Part 3 The Conquest of Canaan

As explained in Part 1, the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt took place c. 1446 BCE          at the end of the reign of Tutmose(s) III.

And as explained in Part 2, the people Moses led from Egypt had long self-identified as "Evrim"  עִבְרִי:  meaning from north of the Euphrates river – i.e. Mesopotamians, and proudly so.

Over the two centuries in Egypt, they multiplied and took on the distinct and exclusive tribal name of “the Children of Israel”    בְּני  ישְׂרָאֵל

 

The Conquest as per the books of Joshua and Judges

The Conquest of Canaan led by Joshua took place 40 years after the Exodus, starting c.1406 BCE. (See Deut. 8: 2 and Joshua 1:1-2)

It is recorded in both the books of Joshua and Judges.

Some 300 communities and cities are named in the book of Joshua as being conquered[i]

The details in Joshua present a glowing account of one great victory after another until Joshua was 110 years old and about to die (Joshua 24:29).

But then, Joshua 13: 1-6 acknowledges that much was still unconquered and lists these areas.

Further conquests after Joshua’s death are recorded in Judges chapter 1.

It starts with the additional areas conquered by Judah and Simon often working together. Both destroyed the conquered cities and enslaved or expelled their local inhabitants.

But in verse Judges 1:19 it notes that Judah failed to defeat the inhabitants of the valley as ”they had chariots of iron”, and so Judah remained in the hill country.

 

As for the other tribes, they allowed the native Canaanites they conquered to stay on    as vassals:

  • Benjamin allowed the Jezubites to remain in Jerusalem (Judges 1: 21)
  • Manasseh allowed the Canaanites to live on in many cities and towns as vassals (Judges 1: 27-28)
  • Ephraim did not remove the Canaanites of Gezer (Judges 1: 29)
  • Zebulun left two major Canaanite cities in tact with their people paying tribute (Judges 1: 30)
  • Asher left intact the Canaanite communities of seven (7) cities and ”dwelt among the Canaanites”. (Judges 1: 31-32)
  • Naphtali just made the cities and peoples Beth-shemesh and of Beth-anath tributaries (Judges 1:33)
  • And while Dan failed to conquer the Amorites in the valley and was forced to live only in the hill country, the Amorites were eventually made tributary by “the house of Joseph” (Judges 1: 34-36)

 

Consequently, numerous Canaanite communities of the 7 nations- - plus the Philistines and Zidonians (Judges 3: 3) -- continued to live in the Promised Land for generations.

Contrary to God’s orders (Judge 2:2-3), the Israelites often did not destroy or expel the Canaanites but made them their vassals.

And the descendants from the second generation after Joshua fell into pagan worship under Canaanite influence: especially the arch deities of the male and female duo of Baal and Asherah (Judges 2: 13).

They also regularly intermarried (Judges 3; 6).

 

It is succinctly summarized in Judges 3: 1- 7

  וְאֵלֶּה הַגּוֹיִם אֲשֶׁר הִנִּיחַ יְהוָה, לְנַסּוֹת בָּם אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר לֹא-יָדְעוּ, אֵת כָּל-מִלְחֲמוֹת כְּנָעַן.

1 Now these are the nations which the LORD left, to prove Israel by them, even as many as had not known all the wars of Canaan;

ב  רַק, לְמַעַן דַּעַת דֹּרוֹת בְּנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל, לְלַמְּדָם, מִלְחָמָה--רַק אֲשֶׁר-לְפָנִים, לֹא יְדָעוּם.

2 only that the generations of the children of Israel might know, to teach them war, at the least such as beforetime knew nothing thereof;

ג  חֲמֵשֶׁת סַרְנֵי פְלִשְׁתִּים, וְכָל-הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַצִּידֹנִי, וְהַחִוִּי, יֹשֵׁב הַר הַלְּבָנוֹן--מֵהַר בַּעַל חֶרְמוֹן, עַד לְבוֹא חֲמָת.

3 namely, the five lords of the Philistines, and all the Canaanites, and the Zidonians, and the Hivites that dwelt in mount Lebanon, from mount Baal-hermon unto the entrance of Hamath.

ד  וַיִּהְיוּ, לְנַסּוֹת בָּם אֶת-יִשְׂרָאֵל--לָדַעַת, הֲיִשְׁמְעוּ אֶת-מִצְוֺת יְהוָה, אֲשֶׁר-צִוָּה אֶת-אֲבוֹתָם, בְּיַד-מֹשֶׁה.

4 And they were there, to prove Israel by them, to know whether they would hearken unto the commandments of the LORD, which He commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses.

ה  וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, יָשְׁבוּ בְּקֶרֶב הַכְּנַעֲנִי, הַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי, וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי.

5 And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites;

ו  וַיִּקְחוּ אֶת-בְּנוֹתֵיהֶם לָהֶם לְנָשִׁים, וְאֶת-בְּנוֹתֵיהֶם נָתְנוּ לִבְנֵיהֶם; וַיַּעַבְדוּ, אֶת-אֱלֹהֵיהֶם.

6 and they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their gods.

ז  וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְנֵי-יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת-הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה, וַיִּשְׁכְּחוּ אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיהֶם; וַיַּעַבְדוּ אֶת-הַבְּעָלִים, וְאֶת-הָאֲשֵׁרוֹת.

7 And the children of Israel did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgot the LORD their God, and served the Baalim and the Asheroth.

 

 

SUMMARY

The Bible does not state how many years Joshua led the Conquest of Canaan but by the time of his death, not all had been conquered and not all native Canaanites and other pagan inhabitants had been ‘removed’.

Only the tribes of Judah and Simon seem to have followed the ‘total conquest’ Divine directive, while 7 of the 10 tribes[ii] who crossed the Jordan were willing to let native communities stay on as vassals paying tribute.

As to the tribe of Issachar and its conquest actions -- or inactions --  Judges is silent.

 

The Amarna Letters

The Amarna Letters, a trove of 382 clay tablets in cuneiform found at Pharaoh Akhenaton’s newly built capital of Amarna, contain some 3 dozen letters sent from Canaan and the upper eastern Mediterranean coast to Egypt complaining of invaders and the need for military assistance from Egypt – their overlord and ‘protector’.

The invaders are called Apiru, a term also pronounced Hapiru or Habiru, and found in numerous other records from throughout the Fertile Crescent covering some 600 years as far back as the 18th century BCE.[iii]

The term means in ancient Sumerian ‘dusty/dirty’ and was used for outlaws, robbers, raiders, mercenaries and rebels, and also for servants, slaves and labourers.  As such,   it was a derogatory label for any group who were considered ‘outsiders’, ‘troublemakers’ or of low social status[iv].

Now the Amarna Letter pleas for aid against Apiru invaders are normally dated to at most the 30 years or so between 1360 BCE and 1332 BCE as other of the letters name the recipients as Pharaoh Amenhotep III, his successor Amenhotep IV (who changed his name to Akhenaton), and an unnamed young third pharaoh -- possibly his son, Tutankhamen. [v]  

Numerous of these letters – from rulers of cities in Canaan and Lebanon -- ask for military assistance from the pharaoh of Egypt, their overlord, who is bound by their overlord–vassal agreements to send help if any invader threatens them.

The mayor of Byblos, Rib-Hadda, is one of the most frequent writers asking for military aid and reporting on what is happening.

In EA 76, EA121, EA77 and EA82 he ask for many archers to defend the city walls of Byblos and EA 71 asks for 100 horsemen and 200 foot soldiers as well.

In EA82 Rib-Hadda even declares that if no archers arrive in 2 months, he will flee the city.

According to EA 71, the arch villain who became the Apiru’s leader is a “traitor” named Abdi Asirta.

Abdi Asirta is blamed for further successful attacks in EA82, EA73, EA74, EA121,EA88 and EA82, but EA101 reports his death at the hands of pirates when he refused to pay tribute the northern overlord, the Mittani.

However, his son Aziru succeeded him as leader and continues to attack cities (EA147)

The mayor of Sidon also writes (EA144) asking for help as all his outlying cities have gone over to the Apiru.  But a letter from the head of Tyre, Abi Milku (EA147) tells the pharaoh that the mayor of Sidon is daily sending messages to the rebel leader Aziru.

EA148 from Abi Milku claims the mayor of Sidon is raiding land still loyal to the Pharaoh and that the King of Hazor has joined the Apiru side.

But in turn, the king of Hazor writes he is still loyal to pharaoh and guarding Hazor and its village for Egypt (EA228) .

As for Damascus and its subordinate cities, according to EA189, it switched to the Apiru side but was recovered by force by Etakkama, mayor of Qadesh.

Then, a letter (EA215) by one Bayawa predicts that unless the pharaoh sends an ambassador to work something out, within a year all of the coast will be lost.

In EA90, Rib-Hadda claims all of his territory and cities other than Byblos have been captured or gone over to Abdi Asirta and the Apiru.  

EA88 warns that without Egyptian military intervention, the Apiru will easily conquer all the coastal cities and area down to Egypt’s border.

The cities asking for such help or which are mentioned as under attack or conquered are: Byblos and Sumur in EA68 and EA76, Beirut and Sidon in EA118, and Ammiya in EA73 and EA74.

In Hugo Winckler’s translation [vi] (henceforth coded with a W)  W141 states the ruler of Beirut anticipates Egyptian troops will be sent soon.

The mayor of Meggido sends a letter (EA243) that he is still successfully protecting Megiddo for the pharaoh but the war with the Apiru rages on.

In EA246 the same Meggido mayor complains that the two sons of the ruler of Shechem are bribing the Apiru to attack Meggido.

And in EA244,  the mayor of Meggido complains that the ruler of Shechem is now attacking his city.

To the above claim, the mayor of Shechem replies to pharaoh (EA254) that he was unaware of his sons helping the Apiru and that he is still loyal to pharaoh.

The ruler of the southern city of Gezer writes (EA299) that his city is under Apiru attack and will fall without military aid from Egypt. 

In W292, the ruler of Gezer writes he is eagerly awaiting the arrival of Egyptian troops.

 

Furthermore, EA 298 states the mayor of Gezer’s brother has now switched to the Apiru side.

 

 

 

 

EA271 is a joint plea for aid from the mayors of Gezer and Hebron.

EA284 from the mayor of Hebron, is stark: “All your lands have been taken away. I am all alone.” And in EA366 he says only he and the mayor of Jerusalem are still in charge of cities loyal to pharaoh.

The ruler of Jerusalem himself writes pharaoh: “The Apiru have plundered all the lands of pharaoh” EA286. And in EA287 the mayor of Jerusalem states he and his city alone are loyal. Gezer, Ashkelon and Lachish have gone over to the Apiru side.

But Ashkelon’s mayor (EA323) and Lachish’s mayor (EA329 and EA330) reassure pharaoh they are still loyal to him.

The mayor of Jerusalem informs the pharaoh (EA289) that Shechem has switched to the Apiru side.

EA288 from the mayor of Jerusalem reports that all the other cities and lands have fallen to the Apiru and he stands alone.  Three mayors were murdered; two at the city gate of Shiloh and one at Lachish.

Lastly EA 290 from the mayor of Jerusalem states one of his cities has deserted to the Apiru and without Egyptian archers his city – and all of Canaan - will soon be in Apiru hands.

 

The map below[vii] shows the location of the eastern Mediterranean cities mentioned in the letters as under Apiru attack.

 

They range from Sumur, Byblos and Beirut in the far north to Jerusalem and then somewhat further south to Hebron, Lachish and Ashkelon in central Canaan.

As for Jericho and Beer Sheba, they are never mentioned in the Amarna letters that are not badly fragmented or illegible.

 

 

Problems re Amarna Letters

 

Dating

As argued in Part 1, the Exodus took place at the end of Pharaoh Tutmose(s) III’s reign c. 1446 BCE, and Joshua’s conquest of Canaan started 40 years later c. 1406 BCE.

So dating the Amarna Letter pleas for immediate help against invading Apiru to 1360 BCE to 1332 BCE -- as Wikipedia does -- makes no sense: they would be some 40 to 70 years too late!

The letter dating issue, however, disappears when using Redford’s chronology timeline (just like his dating for the Exodus under Tutmose(s) III.)

Redford dates the reign of Amenhotep III – the named recipient of many of the Amarna Letters [viii] --  to 1410 -1372 BCE.[ix]

A perfect fit for Joshua and the Israelites invading c.1406 BCE.

 

Problems with Steve Rudd analysis[x]

With all due respect to the massive effort and detail Steve Rudd has put into his Bible.ca article[xi] on the Amarna Letters as independent evidence of Joshua’s conquest, Rudd ‘over-reaches’ and is often blind to obvious ‘difficulties’ in using the Amarna Letters re the  books of Joshua and Judges narrative.

 

 

 

Apiru/Hapiru/Habiru vs Evri/Evrim

 

Rudd translates the word Apiru/Hapiru/Habiru every time as Hebrews. And he rationalizes this in his “The Chronology of Hebrew Conquest as seen in the Amarna Tablets Introduction: part 3.”

 

He states Habiru and Hebrew are one and the same word when written in ancient, vowel-less script, and that both mean to be a ‘wanderer”.

 

Now there is some merit to this. 

 

Wikipedia gives some credence to his first argument as it uses the spelling Habiru for its entry heading – though it soon points out the proper spelling/pronunciation is Apiru.[xii]

 

As for the word “Hebrew”, it is an Anglicized term that barely relates to the actual word and its pronunciation: singular  Evri  עִבְרִי and plural Evrim  עִבְרִי.

 

So, there is at best a very vague similarity between the consonants of Apiru and Evrim.

 

 

 

 

Secondly, Rudd’s meaning of “wanderer” is recognized as one interpretation for Apiru by Wikipedia, i.e., “nomad”, and even "those who cross from the other side”,[xiii] -- and the latter matches the traditional meaning of Evri/Evrim as noted in Part 2.

 

But as argued in Part 2, from Abraham onward, he and his descendants were proud to call themselves EVRI/EVRIM, but the term APIRU was used as a derogatory slur and insult that no self-respecting Israelite – or anyone else -- would call themselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More importantly, Rudd, in his zeal to find independent proof of the Bible’s narrative of the Conquest, ignores two related key facts from the Amarna Letters.

 

 

Geography

The Amarna letters include many from the mayor of Byblos and how his city and vicinity are under attack from the Apiru.

The mayor even states a local, one Abdi Asirta, has turned ”traitor” and become the leader of the Apiru.  

And on his death, he was succeeded by his son, Aziri.

 

Now Rudd sees these attacks by Apiru on Byblos and the far north as if they were carried out by Joshua and the Israelites, but this is impossible!

 

The book of Joshua and Judges only record military campaigns in upper, central and southern Canaan: nothing that would reach far north into Lebanon.

As well, the local “traitors” who became the successive leaders of the Apiru in the Lebanese north, Abdi Asirta and  Aziri, are named in numerous other Amarna Letters as senders: as kings communicating in friendly fashion with their acknowledged overlord: the pharaoh of Egypt and with his officials.[xiv]

They had established their own kingdom, called in these letters :

·         Abdi Asirta:  EA60-62

·         Aziri:  EA 156-161, EA 164-9 and EA 171.

 

And they acknowledged Egypt and Pharaoh as their overlord.

In the translation coding by Hugo Winckler (1896),[xv]  letters #42, #44, #47 by Aziri profess his loyalty to pharaoh as his overlord.  And in Winckler #48 and #51 Aziri apologizes to Pharaoh for the delay in rebuilding Sumur – “the pharaoh’s city”, and in #48 also promises to soon send the required tribute to pharaoh.

 

So, they and the territory in the north which they conquered is separate and different from that which Joshua and the Israelite conquered further south.

Put simply, in the eyes of the mayors from northern Byblos to Gezer and Jerusalem, invaders are all the same, and given the same slanderous label of APIRU.

 

Steve Rudd has also fallen into this mindset.

From the first tablets sent from Byblos re the attack on Sumur (EA 68, 76) to the defection of Ammiya  (EA 73, 74), danger to Sidon and Beirut (EA118), Tyre and Sidon (EA 147, 148), Hazor (EA228), Qadesh and  Damascus (EA189) – all located in Lebanon and well beyond Canaaan -- Rudd each time translates Apiru as HEBREWS.   

 

When translating the Amarna letters pleas which name as the head of  the far north Apiru ‘enemy’ as Abdi Asirta, and stress he is a ‘local’ and “traitor”’ (EA 71, 73, 74, 88, 121), Rudd acknowledges Abdi-Asirta is a “non-Hebrew” but continues to call the Apiru who made Abdi Asirta their leader as HEBREWS.  The same with Abdi Asirta’s son and successor, Aziri (EA 147).

 

Even Rudd’s own map of Joshua’s conquests puts Joshua’s most northerly campaign (#8 on his map) as against the coalition of northern Amorite kings which took place at Mt Meron and involved no city further north than Hazor (Joshua 11: 1-13). 

So any claim by Rudd that the Amarna Letters relating to attacks in the area of Lebanon cannot be part of the Joshua led Israelite Conquest.

Put simply, in his excessive zeal, Rudd extends the Israelite invasion as recorded in Joshua and Judges into the far north without Biblical proof. 

The Amarna attacks or capture of Tyre, Sidon, Beirut,  Byblos, Ammiya and Sumur  are way beyond any Joshua led or Judges ch. 1 invasions as recorded in the Bible.

                                                      

Rudd also ignores the other letters sent to pharaoh Amenhotep III by King Abdi-Asirta and to an unnamed pharaoh by his successor, King Aziri (noted above), and their independent kingdom of Amurru.

Abdi-Asirta and his son Aziri were NOT ISRAELITES – a fact the Amarna letters and even Rudd acknowledges, and the  Amurru kingdom they created and ruled is NOT part of the Israelite Conquest of Canaan territory. 

So Rudd ‘oversteps’ and fails to recognize there were two separate invasions going on along the eastern Mediterranean by ‘outsiders’.

·         An invasion of Lebanon and Syria to the far north culminating in the new kingdom of Amurru,

·         and a totally separate and distinct invasion of Canaan by Joshua and the Israelites.

 

Both took place more or less at the same time and due to the same opportunity: when Egypt was either militarily weakened (even 40 years after the Exodus), distracted by other concerns, or simply ‘disinterested’.

 

Whatever the case, Egypt’s inaction made a mockery of its official and legal overlord status.

 

The Letters that ask for aid often address the pharaoh as a god-like figure:[xvi]

“to the king, my lord, my god, my sun…”  EA148

“to pharaoh, my god, my sun, the sun from the sky …”  EA299

“I fall at the feet of my king, my sun, my god 7 times and 7 times: on the stomach and on the back…”   EA 215

“I fall before you 7 times on my tummy, 7 times on my back to worship you, O pharaoh … “  EA 284

 

But such submissive language and reverence was unanswered.

 

As noted in two Amarna letters W76 and W79, Rib-Hadda once he fled to Beirut and his Beirut host (who is also under Aziri attack) remind the current pharaoh that the former pharaoh honoured his duty to protect  his vassals.

Rib-Hadda in W71 particularly complains that the messenger he sent to pharaoh’s court for military aid has returned empty handed.

And in W72, Pharaoh tells Rib-Hadda ‘to fend for yourself’.

 

Such failure to act is surprising as some vassals write in the Letters that they are ready to supply auxiliary troops: men and chariots to pharaoh forces in assistance: W253 and similarly W263 from the prince of Nazima.

In what seems to be a final letter, W105,  Rib-Hadda pleas to pharaoh to send ships so he and his family can safely escape to Egypt.  But this plea – like all requests for military aid -- seems to have gone unanswered.

  

Now, similar salutations are used in the letters by Aziri to pharaoh:

 To the king, my lord, my god, my [S]un: Message of Aziru, your servant.   I fall at the feet of my lord 7 times and 7 times...”               EA156  and EA161  

 

In EA161 Aziri apologizes to the pharaoh for not yet rebuilding Sumur as ordered by Pharaoh and explains his territory has been attacked and he has been too busy defending his kingdom.

As Sumur was conquered by Aziri’s father, Abdi-Asirta as noted in EA68 and EA 76, and became part of the new kingdom of Amurru, it is surprising that pharaoh still considers it ‘Egyptian territory’ and that Aziri acquiesces and promises to soon rebuild it as pharaoh orders.

The letter also notes he is preparing the tribute shipment for pharaoh and will soon as possible come to Egypt to see the pharaoh as ordered.

Lastly, EA171 notes Aziri has just come back from visiting pharaoh in Egypt.

 

So how does one make sense of all of this?

Vassals in need of military aid are ignored.

Conquering invaders: Abdi-Asirta and then his son and successor Aziri, are on friendly terms with pharaoh and become is subject vassals paying tribute.

And they allow pharaoh to consider the lands they conquered and made into their new kingdom; supplanting pharaoh’s previous vassals, as if pharaoh (still) owned them.

 

A very odd situation.  

With a ‘laissez faire’ Egyptian attitude on the one hand and a fear of what Egypt might do keeping local old and new rulers in line -- as tribute paying vassals.

 

Carl Niebuh in his detailed analysis of the entire Amarna Letters concludes:

… the state of affairs in Syria and Canaan; perhaps Amenophis III [i.e., Amenhotep III] whatever his own great slackness, [057] simply inherited the confusion in this part of his empire. The heaviest blows could not in the long run prevent the Habiri from returning to the attack again and again at brief intervals. Their need of expansion was greater than their fear, and, after all, it mattered little to Pharaoh whether the Habirite or the Canaanite paid tribute in Palestine as soon as the intruder was prepared to acknowledge his rights. (p. 36)[xvii] 

                                                                            (My red lettering)

 

The creation of Amurru in the north and the Conquest of Canaan by Joshua and the Israelites to the south attest to the ‘disinterest’ --  if not the military weakness -- of Egypt in the eastern Mediterranean coast: even though it was obliged by its overlord-vassal treaties to protect the existing cities and their rulers.

The Amurru kings developed excellent relations with Egypt and accepted the pharaoh as their overlord and his exaggerated and pompous claims to ‘own’ all vassal lands: probably out of fear that if ‘roused’ the Egyptian lion would take devastating military action.

 

As for Canaan and the area conquered by Joshua and the Israelites further south, while it is always dangerous to argue from silence, it seems clear that during the Conquest as per the book of Joshua that Egypt was ‘absent’ as overlord and protector, and from the events recorded in the book of Judges and 1 and 2 Samuel, Egypt was ‘irrelevant’ in local politics and warfare for the next 400 years!

No intervention while the Israelites invaded and conquered one Egyptian vassal after another.

And, thereafter, no sign of Egyptian intervention for some 350 years to help the Israelites in turn when their lands suffered repeated raiding and invasion by -- and overlord submission to -- one local tribe after another: Aram (8yrs), Moab (18 yrs.),  Jabin the Canaanite (20 yrs.), Midian  (7yrs), Amalek and others, Ammon (18 yrs.) and the Philistines (3 separate times).

Similarly, any Egyptian overlord role is ‘missing’ in the wars of King Saul against Nahash the Ammonite (1 Samuel ch.12), Amalek (1 Samuel ch.15) and the Philistines (1 Samuel 13: 3 –23, 14: 4-13, ch. 17, 18: 25-30,  23:1-5 and  ch 31) and King David’s expansions.

King David, after capturing Jerusalem and making it his capital (2 Samuel 5:6-9), defeated the five (5) lords of the Philistines who had previously  been overlords over the Israelites, and now made them and their cities under his overlordship (2 Samuel 5: 17-2 and 8:1).

Then David expanded north and east. He conquer Moab, Zobah, Damascus (2 Samuel 8:2-6), Ammon and Amalek (2 Samuel 8:12) and when these rebelled they were defeated in battles as recorded in 2 Samuel ch 10.

ealsoo subjugatedheHHHe

 

 

He also subjugated the Edomite by the Dead Sea (2 Samuel 8: 14).  And his general Joab successfully besieged Rabbah (2 Samuel 11:1 and 12:26 and 29).

And when late in David’s reign the Philistines rebelled, they were defeated at Gob (2 Samuel 21:15 and18).

 

It is only with the reign of King Solomon that Egypt appears as important.  As stated in 1 Kings 3:1, Solomon soon after he became king (c. 970 BCE) allied himself with Egypt and its pharaoh: an alliance sealed by King Solomon’s formal marriage to a daughter of (probably) Pharaoh Siamun (Redford dating 984 -965 BCE).[xviii]

 

So, it would seem that the absence of a ‘supportive’ Egyptian overlord as attested by the Amarna Letters, continued re: Canaan for over 400 years!

 

While the cat is away, the mice will play!

                      and

Beware the sleeping lion.



[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_in_the_Book_of_Joshua#:~:text=The%20Book%20of%20Joshua%20lists,%2C%20Jordan%2C%20Lebanon%20and%20Syria.

[ii] The tribes of Reuben and Gad settled totally east of the Jordan so only 10 tribes settled in the Promised Land to the west. (See Joshua ch.22)

[iv] Ibid.

[viii] EA 2-4, EA 17-25, EA32, EA 52-55, EA 60-61.  See list at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarna_letters

[xiv] See Wkipedia list of every letter at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarna_letters

No comments:

Post a Comment