Israel's Exodus and Egypt's Record Aligns!

The Amarna diplomatic letters exposed vassal relationships between field commanders, acting as local kings and Pharaoh their Egyptian ruler. Commanders of field garrisons, who defended Egyptian territories, sometimes expressed conflicting interests that often triggered a spate of letter writing. Victories, defeats or political turmoil weighed heavily on the writings.

The tablets appear to have been buried with Akhenaten at El Amarna, but they are not the originals, mostly made of clay from areas east of the Jordan River, they are deemed authentic copies. One such letter #254 titled "Neither Rebel nor Delinquent" by Labaya commander of the Samaria region, from Sakmu, the biblical city of Shechem exposed serious allegations against him for having surrendered land to the Habiru (see Deuteronomy 11:30 and Genesis 12:6).  This and the related letters further south at Uru-Salem, biblical Jerusalem discuss battles waged by the Habiru. 

Military correspondence from Canaan also known as Retenju 

Dating and sources of the Amarna letters are thought to span Egyptian Pharaoh's Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, through possibly Smenkhkare or Tutankhamun around 150 years. These Pharaoh's may have overlapped Biblical Hebrew or Israelite presence, enslavement in, exile from Egypt, early Canaanite wars and land resettlement. However, published chronologies have left much open to speculation, here we propose a resolution. The Labaya tablet #254 and others reference Pharaoh in his 32nd year of reign leaving only Amenhotep III who held power for 36-38 years during the Amarna period. According to the classic chronology Amenhotep III died in 1351 BCE.

The Bible describes Israel's 40 year sojourn, before it entered the land of Canaan and Joshua, the Israelite leader is said to have ruled 32 years after that. If there is a Biblical relationship to the Habiru, even if only some were Hebrew Israelite's raiding Canaan then letter #254 must have been written during the overlap of Amenhotep III and Joshua's 32 year reign, which according to the Biblical record ended in 1245 BCE. But, the 100 year gap between Amenhotep III and Joshua would need a resolution.

Prince Thutmose, the eldest son of Amenhotep III died in the third decade of his fathers reign. Stepping in, his younger brother Amenhotep IV (also known as Akhenaten) became the "strange" Pharaoh as depicted in uncharacteristically abstract art from his reign. From evidence at Amarna we know the mummified elite of Egypt had a poor state of health despite opposite representations reflected in artwork of the time. Amarna depicts how distance enabled diplomatic façade, appearance of control and power, yet reality was always different. For Akhenaten losing control of Retjenu (Canaan) may have been his diplomatic inheritance and artistic downfall.

From evidence toward the end of the 13th century BCE, Papyrus Anastasi III, Merneptah Stele (1203 BCE), Egyptian late bronze age temple at Jerusalem's École biblique and tombs north and north-west of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah we learn about a prolonged Egyptian commitment and interest in Canaan during the approximately 250 years of military activity from Amenhotep III to Merneptah. In addition to strategic and regional benefits, a long term commitment to Canaan may have been etched in the psyche of Egyptian leaders by Egypt's founder and first Pharaoh Khem. According to the Biblical record Khem (Biblical Ham) may have incestuously fathered Canaan. The place name Canaan is common in Egyptian and Biblical records.

This most tumultuous military period directly overlaps Israelite tribes who were displacing local Canaanite leaders and populations, long connected with Egypt, as they settled their indigenous land and entitlements east and west of the Jordan River. This re-settlement spanned a period of 300 years from Joshua until King David culminating the Israelite inheritance consistent with biblical teachings and tribal agreements.

In one letter, Adoni-Tzedek pleaded to convince Akhenaten to take the faster coastal route to rescue the dire situation in Jerusalem. And a letter, early in the reign of Akhenaten showed that the coast road was still open (pg278) when King Dusratta (Mitanni Empire) wrote to his son-in-law Akhenaten twenty years later, but no help appears to have been sent. If letter #254 describes the Biblical events that took place in 1273 BCE, at the beginning of Joshua's reign the Egyptian chronology immediately prior to the Amarna period would have to be revised forward by around ~100 years, which would be difficult for classical Egyptologists to digest. Joshua must then have overlapped Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, which if we wind back 40 years, would make Thutmose IV the prime candidate at the time of the Israelite Exodus led by Moses. 

Even though the lower Galilee was, for some few years subdued, under Philistia and Syria it was reconquered by Rameses II, whose battle relief also mentions "Shalem" (Jerusalem), but historians reveal that neither he or his garrisons ever entered the Judæan mountains that were impassable for chariots, their supreme weapon of war. Seemingly, Jerusalem had been abandoned by Rameses II as well.

The events placed in these time frames may help us to better understand events that pre-dated Moses when "Pithom and Rameses", Egyptian cities built by Israelite slaves, may have underwritten the economic and political impetus that promoted the "House of Rameses" to compete for and obtain the status of Pharaoh over all of Egypt. However, by the time Rameses I and II became Pharaoh's it was already the latter half of Israel's 300 year resettlement of Canaan as recorded in The Book of Judges.

Often overlooked is the earliest recorded use of the Hebrew language by Ever (great-grandson of Noah) preceding Biblical Abraham, whose father, Terach and extended families continued to live in Haran, northern Syria. They were also likely referred to as Habiru, but their various lineages were not Israelite. Regardless, the Habiru referred in the Amarna letters are almost certainly those Israelites who arrived from Egypt to conquer and re-settle Canaan.

 

Jerusalem vs. The Sun!

The origins of Christianity and Judaism differ significantly, including by a clergy who faced east to herald the sun or west to obviate it. Orientation in church architecture is toward the altar, the main interior interest is positioned towards the east, the main entrance to the west end. But, Jerusalem's temple architecture was opposite, it opposed the sun rising and biblical history is replete (2 Kings 23:1-25) with sun worshipers who challenged its main point of interest, its Holy Inner Sanctuary positioned toward the west. 

A recent ~2600 year old City of David, Jerusalem discovery relates the last period in which the horses of the sun gods were destroyed by King Josiah (see video).

                                        

Whats the big deal you may ask? Respect or disrespect - not as much about the direction priestly practitioners face, rather the direction their rear ends face! That insult laid waste untold millions of lives over thousands of years and provides a fascinating insight to the origins of Jerusalem's temple culture and subsequent rise of organized religion. 

The discovery of rock-cut-rooms on the east facing, lower slope of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah, in proximity to the Gihon Spring may be Jerusalem's original temple, so called Temple Zero. 

West end features including raised platform for altar

The notable direction of Temple Zero is by the placement of its most important features including matzevah, or standing stone and raised platform, the remnant of its altar toward the west. Priests offering and attending to sacrifices on this altar would have faced west and wine or water poured onto the altar would have run in the liquids channel toward the pit on the east. Facing west obviated glorification of the sun, especially obvious during sunrise worship. 

West to the matzevah

West to the altars' raised platform

Jewish religious practice does not permit the use of any medium or physical depiction as a conduit or substitute to a unified, omnipotent and directly approachable God. This premise dates back prior to the biblical record through establishment of monotheism. The practice transferred from Adam to Noah, to his son Shem known as Malchi-Tzedek (the Righteous King) and finally his descendant Abraham was the first to effect and teach the religious philosophy that was distinguished from the duality of paganism. 

The bible prohibited post-Egyptian Israelite's from using a matzevah to covenant with God. Abraham's grandson Jacob was the last to erect such a stone at Beit El (Bethel) before the prohibition. Approximately 650 years after Jacob (Israel) was exiled to Egypt before King David returned the nation's central administration to Mount Moriah.  

Practically the steep eastern slope is crowd unfriendly. The bedrock to the west rises (as seen by the retainer wall constructed for these excavations) and to the east falls away rapidly (as seen in the people walking up the steep ascent). Yet, by its very layout worship at this site did not pay homage to the sun. So, what was its purpose in context to the site of Solomon's first temple through the Herodian second temple further north on Mount Moriah?

                    

                                            

East to the Kidron Valley

From the great work of Israel Antiquities Archaeologist, Ortal Chalaf (standing @2 - middle image above) and Joe Uziel, we are fortunate to glimpse the ten times this space was built, destroyed and rebuilt over hundreds of years from the eighth century BCE to the end of the Iron Age (image @3). This evidences the tension between eagerness of and opposition to occupants that once heralded this sacred place. The biblical record at the end of the Iron Age reveals the fickle character of Jewish Kings who permitted or shunned idol worship in this period and the evidence at this location may directly reflect the Royal attitudes.

Remarkably, the matzevah has withstood the tests of at least 2800 years, from the earliest layer of  construction and destruction above the bedrock. Almost certainly Temple Zeros' rock-cut-rooms precede the first layer built on the bedrock of the image @3, but was it in existence when King David arrived in the 10th century, ~200 years earlier? Most archaeologists agree that part of the fortified passage made up by Wall 109 (left) and Wall 108 (right) (see below) rises to intersect the bedrock ridge of the rock-cut-rooms and it dates to the middle bronze age.  

 Wall 109 and 108 and rock-cut-quarry block passage to Temple Zero (top center)

The fortified passage was a major construction, involving imported, regional labor forces an event that is not recorded in the bible. Despite Joe Uziel carbon dating the north east tower corner, the complex is not considered to be a part of King David's early Iron Age activities. Reference to a pre-Solomon temple is also not mentioned in the 24 books of the bible, therefore a search for Temple Zero dating clarity should be directed to the Bronze Age.

Temple Zero's altar faced the sun, its priests were before the altar, with their backs to the sun. This opposed most, if not all idolatrous practitioners who otherwise would place their deities or human gods in the place of the altar facing the sun and priests before their deity, with their backs to the sun. Alternatively as with Christianity, priests were after (behind) the altar facing east toward the sun. 

Is this the reason Temple Zero was relegated to a rock-cut-quarry (or pool) that blocked ascent from the east and a fortified passage that blocked access from the north-west? It did not celebrate deities or human gods and had no place for priests to practice after the altar, for idol worshiping occupants of ancient Jerusalem it had little use.

The holy center of Jerusalem opposed sun worshipers (Temple Zero bottom left)

In the time before King David whether buried or blocked, even detractors of Temple Zero preserved its sanctity and the matzevah stands as a testament. Perhaps it was concealed so that its spiritual attractiveness to Israelite worshipers of a monotheistic God would be diminished or forgotten and with it their desire to return to The Mountain.