Israelite slaves....

[MarkCorrigan]

Apologies if this should be in Religion & Philosophy.

I have been talking to a Jewish friend of mine, and I happened to mention that as far as I was aware, there was no evidence for the Israelite slavery in Ancient Egypt. Now, she asked me to find evidence (I've got her thinking critically. Score one to me) and I went on a google search. Only most of it was Christian "Evidence" that basically amounted to "The Egyptians purged records!!!1!"

So....any help/refutations?

Thank you in advance.

[leon_heller]

A TV documentary I saw a few years ago concluded there was no evidence that the Israelites had ever been slaves in Egypt.

Leon

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

First: The word, "slave," is never used in relation to the Egyptian bondage.

If (big IF) the Israelites were in Egypt, it'd be because of Joseph, and thus long-term residents. As long-term residents, they may have been considered serfs, which, while being a form of bondage, is not slavery.

...and how, archeologically, would you tell the difference between one population of city-dwelling, sheep-eating nomads and another population of city-dwelling sheep-eating city dwellers?

Just asking.

[MarkCorrigan]

Hi

First: The word, "slave," is never used in relation to the Egyptian bondage.

If (big IF) the Israelites were in Egypt, it'd be because of Joseph, and thus long-term residents. As long-term residents, they may have been considered serfs, which, while being a form of bondage, is not slavery.

...and how, archeologically, would you tell the difference between one population of city-dwelling, sheep-eating nomads and another population of city-dwelling sheep-eating city dwellers?

Just asking.

....Well for one thing, the Egyptians were pretty obvious, particularly in the later periods of their existance as a dominant civilisation.

Secondly, irrespective of whether they were slaves or serfs (and I seriously, SERIOUSLY doubt they were serfs is they were there at all) this is still not evidence that they were even there in the first place.

ETA: what do you mean by "was never used"? Never used by who?

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

....Well for one thing, the Egyptians were pretty obvious, particularly in the later periods of their existance as a dominant civilisation.

Secondly, irrespective of whether they were slaves or serfs (and I seriously, SERIOUSLY doubt they were serfs is they were there at all) this is still not evidence that they were even there in the first place.

ETA: what do you mean by "was never used"? Never used by who?


LOL!

I got a lot of, "bondage," but no, "slaves."

It might have helped if I hadn't spelled it, "slavs."

D'OH! (_8(|)

[MarkCorrigan]

Hi




LOL!

I got a lot of, "bondage," but no, "slaves."

It might have helped if I hadn't spelled it, "slavs."

D'OH! (_8(|)

I...don't understand.

What does this actually mean?

Look, when you said "The word, "slave," is never used in relation to the Egyptian bondage." What did you mean?

Did you mean that the capture and (to make it easier) enslavement of the Jews is never refered to as slavery?

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

I...don't understand.

What does this actually mean?

Look, when you said "The word, "slave," is never used in relation to the Egyptian bondage." What did you mean?

Did you mean that the capture and (to make it easier) enslavement of the Jews is never refered to as slavery?


Not in the King James or New American Standard versions of the bible. Both translate the word, "ebed," as, "servant," and only the word, "bayith," it translated as, "slave," and only in the sense of a, "homeborn slave," in Jeremiah 2:14.

Jeremiah 2:14.
Is Israel a servant? is he a homeborn slave? why is he spoiled?

Note: The KJV uses both servant (ebed) and slave (Bayith) in this passage.

From Strong's Exhaustive Concordance....

ebed:
slave

slave, servant, man-servant
subjects
servants, worshippers (of God)
servant (in special sense as prophets, Levites etc)
servant (of Israel)
servant (as form of address between equals)
Used 800 times in the KJV: servant 744, manservant 23, bondman 21, bondage 10, bondservant 1, on all sides 1
__________

Bayith:
house
house, dwelling habitation
shelter or abode of animals
human bodies (fig.)
of Sheol
of abode of light and darkness
of land of Ephraim
place
receptacle
home, house as containing a family
household, family
those belonging to the same household
family of descendants, descendants as organized body
household affairs
inwards (metaph.)
(TWOT) temple adv
on the inside prep
within
Used 1881 times in the KJV: house 1881, household 54, home 25, within 22, temple 11, prison 16, place 16, family 3, families + (awb: father) 2, dungeon 2, miscellaneous 23
__________

Remember that the Israelites weren't, "captured." They came to Egypt on their own to escape hard times.

From Bible Crosswalk dot Com (http://bible.crosswalk.com/):

1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob. 2 Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, 3 Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin, 4 Dan, and Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. 5 And all the souls that came out of the loins F1 of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already. 6 And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation. 7 And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.

8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. 9 And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: 10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land. 11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses. 12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. 13 And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour: 14 And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in morter, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Exodus+1&section=0&version=kjv&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ex&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1)
F1: Literally who came from the loins of

It sounds like it started off pretty nicely.

But... uhhh... I'm the guy that can't seem to tell between Slavs and slaves!

[Gene L]

Maybe "bondage" is like "bound servants" were in Early America. They were not technically slaves, but not able to work for anyone else, either. Usually tradesmen used them and taught them a trade, fed them and boarded them in exchange for labor.(Bond meaning what it means today; a ledgal agreement between two or more people.)

That was kind of my understanding from watching a story about the pyramids. The people who built them bonded themselves for a certain time doing work, which was the same as taxes.

I think from watching that show or another that the Isrealis weren't truly slaves as we know slavery today; they lived apart and generally pursued their own interests, , but they couldn't leave and had to do the Pharoah's work in leiu of taxes. It was kinda like living in Poland under the USSR in the Cold War.

[MarkCorrigan]

Hi




Not in the King James or New American Standard versions of the bible.

MY Jewish friend who assures me she knows Hebrew, says it's slave, not servant.

So.....epic fail I think.

ETA: Why on earth should I care about what the KJV says?

In fact, why are you even arguing this?

I asked for EVIDENCE.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

MY Jewish friend who assures me she knows Hebrew, says it's slave, not servant.

So.....epic fail I think.

ETA: Why on earth should I care about what the KJV says?

In fact, why are you even arguing this?

I asked for EVIDENCE.


Take it up with the King James and New American Standard guys. :D

I'm looking for, ebed as slave in other translations, right now.

...and I'm researching because I was asked. I'd rather be looking for evidence myself.

(Whoever wrote the Pentateuch had more than a passing familiarity with the Negative Confession (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/literature/religious/bd125b.html) from the Egyptian Book of the Dead (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/literature/religious/bdfront.html), though.)

[MarkCorrigan]

Hi




Take it up with the King James and New American Standard guys. :D

I'm looking for, ebed as slave in other translations, right now.

...and I'm researching because I was asked. I'd rather be looking for evidence myself.

(Whoever wrote the Pentateuch had more than a passing familiarity with the Negative Confession (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/literature/religious/bd125b.html) from the Egyptian Book of the Dead (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/literature/religious/bdfront.html), though.)

Seriously, what was the point in any of what you have posted?

I didn't ask you to look into this, I asked for information about there being no evidence for the slavery, or alternatively for evidence OF the slavery.

This does not help.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

Seriously, what was the point in any of what you have posted?

I didn't ask you to look into this, I asked for information about there being no evidence for the slavery, or alternatively for evidence OF the slavery.

This does not help.


I'll stop.

Manfred Beitak has found evidence of a pre-Hyksos Canaanite settlement at Tell ed-Daba with Canaanite style bronze stuff in the tombs, and apparently, a single large villa amid the Canaanite huts.

This is from a collection of, "Stuff for Christians," sites, so the sources may have been interpreted to death. I'm currently trying to find some downloadable stuff from Manfred, directly, online.

...and the original point was: If you have people living among you, using the same utensils, eating the same food, living in the same houses, wearing the same cloths, and the only real difference between you and them is that they worship a different god, and you happen to live in a polytheistic society, what sort of archeological evidence would you expect to find?

I'm looking for a starting point, here.

[drkitten]

Hi

...and the original point was: If you have people living among you, using the same utensils, eating the same food, living in the same houses, wearing the same cloths, and the only real difference between you and them is that they worship a different god, and you happen to live in a polytheistic society, what sort of archeological evidence would you expect to find?

I'm looking for a starting point, here.

My understanding is that the Egyptians were compulsive record-keepers and very definitely literate; if the slaves were generally distinct in their customs, this would have made it into the literature (if nothing else, in words that were synonymous with "slave" but actually meant "Hebrew," as with the n-word in Huck Finn.)

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

My understanding is that the Egyptians were compulsive record-keepers and very definitely literate; if the slaves were generally distinct in their customs, this would have made it into the literature (if nothing else, in words that were synonymous with "slave" but actually meant "Hebrew," as with the n-word in Huck Finn.)


It may not have been the Egyptians, per se.

A cursory reading of the Beitak data, possibly Pre-Digested for Religious Consumption, points to an occupying culture, the Hyksos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos), who kind of pushed the Egyptians out of the eastern Nile delta, as coming into power after Joseph and his lot moving to Egypt, and the Israelites leaving at the time of the Hyksos Pharaohs.

This would account for the passage about a Pharaoh who didn't know Joseph coming to power.

One of the sources mentions the death of a Hyksos Pharaoh at right about the time that the Israelites would have been leaving, too. Possible coincidence, possible confabulation, possible bullhockey.

Another possibility is that the whole story of Exodus is a retelling of the expulsion of the Hyksos by the Egyptian Pharaoh, Ahmose.

Hard to tell without the original books.

[a_unique_person]

Apologies if this should be in Religion & Philosophy.

I have been talking to a Jewish friend of mine, and I happened to mention that as far as I was aware, there was no evidence for the Israelite slavery in Ancient Egypt. Now, she asked me to find evidence (I've got her thinking critically. Score one to me) and I went on a google search. Only most of it was Christian "Evidence" that basically amounted to "The Egyptians purged records!!!1!"

So....any help/refutations?

Thank you in advance.

There's plenty of evidence for the Babylonian captivity, but nothing in respect of the Egyptians, IIRC.

[marksman]

The Egyptians kept meticulous records, but those records were not meticulously maintained for the last 3,000 years. That said, there is no evidence of which I am aware of any peoples claiming descent from Jacob/Israel living in Egypt under any form of servitude.

The lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, but it is really up to those who wish to establish that the Hebrews lived in Egypt to provde evidence, since it's an extraordinary claim.

We can basically establish that Israel as a kingdom existed circa 1200 BCE from the Merneptah stela and that's the earliest evidence of Israelites. 1200 BCE is pretty close to when Israel is supposedly being founded in the time of the biblical Book of Judges. But there's no archaeological evidence of which I am aware stating from whence the Israelites originated.

[Delvo]

There are Egyptian texts referring to some kind of imported slaves or lower caste, which some people interpret as referring to the Hebrews. The Egyptian phonetics would normally be rendered in our alphabet as "Hibiru" or "Hibaru". But whether or not that's the Israelites is disputed. (I don't know who else those who dispute it say that would be. I only caught a glimpse of an debate between others.)

Also, the pharoah who is thought to have been ruling at the right time and appears to have lost a son, Ramses (II?), also has an interesting inscription in his tomb listing his military record. The only translation for one of the statements on it that I've seen was "Israel is laid waste". But the noteworthy thing about that one is that all of the other ethnic names in this list end with a symbol for mountains, indicating the people's homeland, while the one that got translated as "Israel" ends with a symbol for people, indicating the people themselves rather than their land, thus implying to some that it was a people without a land because if they had one then that could have been indicated in their case as it was in the others.

Also, there's the fact that everybody seems to agree that Moses is not a Hebrew name but an Egyptian one. (But some people say that's because he came to Israel from Egypt and brought monotheism with him, and then ended up with a legend being built up around him as if his story of coming from Egypt were the whole population's story. That part doesn't seem very plausible to me.)

[Delvo]

PS: The story of Jericho is also consistent with the kind of myth that people would create about a place that was built before they got there, which they then came to and occupied (whether or not that meant displacing somebody else who was there first). The destruction of its walls by an earthquake would have been recorded and mythologized very differently if they had been inside at the time it happened.

[marksman]

There are Egyptian texts referring to some kind of imported slaves or lower caste, which some people interpret as referring to the Hebrews. The Egyptian phonetics would normally be rendered in our alphabet as "Hibiru" or "Hibaru". But whether or not that's the Israelites is disputed. (I don't know who else those who dispute it say that would be. I only caught a glimpse of an debate between others.)
I think you mean the "Apiru", of which the Pharaoh Amenhotep III claims to have captured 3600 in 1420 BCE. But these are prisoners of war and would not have been turned into slaves. Plus the timing is off. If the Exodus occurred circa 1200 BCE, then the enslavement of the Israelites would have occurred around 1600 BCE.

THe Apiru could become, eventually, the Hebrews. They're in the right place and the right time period. But they weren't enslaved.

Also, the pharoah who is thought to have been ruling at the right time and appears to have lost a son, Ramses (II?) , also has an interesting inscription in his tomb listing his military record.
This is the Merneptah Stela, which I referencedin my post. The inscription referencing Israel is my Mereptah. He was 60 hen he became Pharaoh and his eldest son (and a lot of other sons and grandsons besides) died before he was Pharaoh, so if there was a Biblical Exodus, he couldn't have been the Pharaoh in question.

everybody seems to agree that Moses is not a Hebrew name but an Egyptian one.
I don't know who "everybody" is. Moses may be a corruption of Rameses (essentially remove the god Ra from the name). But if you're going to invent a name for your Egyptian Prince/Liberator, why wouldn't you use a corruption of an Egyptian name? Rameses was likely the best known Egyptian name in the area at the time, given how many pharoahs named Rameses there have been. The fact that his name is "Moses" doesn't evidence his existence.

There's no evidence that Moses existed. Our earliest record of Israel is 1200 BCE, which is around the time of the Judges and just before Kings Saul and David. Most likely scenario? There were several (maybe eve 12) related tribes of Apiru who worshipped a local deity named El (or YHWH). Over time, El went from a local deity to primary deity supreme over other gods. The Apiru adopted Babylonian creation myths, and stories of being liberated from bondage. Since the Egyptians were the regional superpower at the time, the Egyptians became the antagonists in the Exodus myth.

The Hebrews strugged for identity for many centuries, wavering between exclusive worship of El and a more syncrenistic worship including other local deities like Asherah amd Rimmon. Eventually King Josiah takes the throne "discovers" Deuteronomy and with the aid of the priests of El's Temple, decisively suppressed the worship of other gods.

Then they got exiled to Babylon where they met Zoroastrians, which convinced them to go from "El is first among many" to "El is the only God".

Anyy, that's how I see the evidence.

[Gagglegnash]

Hi

Lol... or, maybe they were all Irish! (http://www.ucadia.com/frank/frank_history_hyksos.htm)

....

(Not actually buying it, but it's fun to read.)

[a_unique_person]

I think you mean the "Apiru", of which the Pharaoh Amenhotep III claims to have captured 3600 in 1420 BCE. But these are prisoners of war and would not have been turned into slaves. Plus the timing is off. If the Exodus occurred circa 1200 BCE, then the enslavement of the Israelites would have occurred around 1600 BCE.

THe Apiru could become, eventually, the Hebrews. They're in the right place and the right time period. But they weren't enslaved.


This is the Merneptah Stela, which I referencedin my post. The inscription referencing Israel is my Mereptah. He was 60 hen he became Pharaoh and his eldest son (and a lot of other sons and grandsons besides) died before he was Pharaoh, so if there was a Biblical Exodus, he couldn't have been the Pharaoh in question.


I don't know who "everybody" is. Moses may be a corruption of Rameses (essentially remove the god Ra from the name). But if you're going to invent a name for your Egyptian Prince/Liberator, why wouldn't you use a corruption of an Egyptian name? Rameses was likely the best known Egyptian name in the area at the time, given how many pharoahs named Rameses there have been. The fact that his name is "Moses" doesn't evidence his existence.

There's no evidence that Moses existed. Our earliest record of Israel is 1200 BCE, which is around the time of the Judges and just before Kings Saul and David. Most likely scenario? There were several (maybe eve 12) related tribes of Apiru who worshipped a local deity named El (or YHWH). Over time, El went from a local deity to primary deity supreme over other gods. The Apiru adopted Babylonian creation myths, and stories of being liberated from bondage. Since the Egyptians were the regional superpower at the time, the Egyptians became the antagonists in the Exodus myth.

The Hebrews strugged for identity for many centuries, wavering between exclusive worship of El and a more syncrenistic worship including other local deities like Asherah amd Rimmon. Eventually King Josiah takes the throne "discovers" Deuteronomy and with the aid of the priests of El's Temple, decisively suppressed the worship of other gods.

Then they got exiled to Babylon where they met Zoroastrians, which convinced them to go from "El is first among many" to "El is the only God".

Anyy, that's how I see the evidence.

From the little I know, that pretty well sums it up. Israel, "defender of El".

[zigaretten]

I think you mean the "Apiru", of which the Pharaoh Amenhotep III claims to have captured 3600 in 1420 BCE. But these are prisoners of war and would not have been turned into slaves.



I like your Babylonian/Zoroastrian theory, but the above has me puzzled. I'm under the impression that prisoners of war (and their families) were the principle source of Egyptian slaves during the New Kingdom period.

[rjh01]

A quick google found this Egyptian pyramid construction techniques (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques)

In addition to the many hypotheses about the techniques involved, there are also disagreements as to the kind of workforce used. One hypothesis, suggested by the Greeks, suggests that the workforce was slaves who were forced to work until the pyramid was done. This hypothesis is no longer widely accepted in the modern era. Archaeologists now believe the Great Pyramid of Giza at least was built by tens of thousands of skilled workers who camped near the pyramids and worked for a salary or as a form of tax payment (levee) until the construction was completed. Worker's cemeteries were discovered in 1990 by archaeologists Zahi Hawass and Mark Lehner.

I heard this from other sources.

See also http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidworkforce.htm

[DC]

A quick google found this Egyptian pyramid construction techniques (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_pyramid_construction_techniques)



I heard this from other sources.

See also http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/pyramidworkforce.htm

In addition to the many hypotheses about the techniques involved, there are also disagreements as to the kind of workforce used. One hypothesis, suggested by the Greeks, suggests that the workforce was slaves who were forced to work until the pyramid was done. This hypothesis is no longer widely accepted in the modern era.

indeed.

[marksman]

From the little I know, that pretty well sums it up. Israel, "defender of El".

Thanks, but "Isra-" doesn't mean "defender" as far as I know. I think the Bible got this one right. It means "struggles with". I have a feeling that although the Israelites borrowed Babylonian creation and liberation myths, the story of Jacob's ladder and his wrestle with the angel is entirely home-grown, and probably one of the stories that gave identity to the Israelites separate from all their neighbors.

[marksman]

I like your Babylonian/Zoroastrian theory, but the above has me puzzled. I'm under the impression that prisoners of war (and their families) were the principle source of Egyptian slaves during the New Kingdom period.

1600 BCE (when the enslavement presumably occurred) is before the practice of enslaving prisoners began in Egypt. But you're right in that if we put the enslavement closer to the 1400's-1500's BCE that would make more sense.

[ponderingturtle]

....Well for one thing, the Egyptians were pretty obvious, particularly in the later periods of their existance as a dominant civilisation.

Secondly, irrespective of whether they were slaves or serfs (and I seriously, SERIOUSLY doubt they were serfs is they were there at all) this is still not evidence that they were even there in the first place.

ETA: what do you mean by "was never used"? Never used by who?

I have heard of evidence of semetic people in Egypt. Now if they where jewish or not is a different argument.