The Old Testament In the Light of The Historical Records and Legends Part 25

CHAPTER VIII. THE TEL-EL-AMARNA TABLETS AND THE EXODUS.

Egypt and Syria before the Exodus-The testimony of the Tel-el-Amarna tablets-The relations between the two countries during the reigns of Amenophis III. and IV.-Burra-burias of Babylonia, Aur-ubalit of a.s.syria-Yabitiri, and others in Palestine-The ?abati and the ?abiri-The Letters of Abdi-?aba (Ebed-tob, Abd-?iba)-The Pharaoh and the prince of the Amorites-Mahler and the date of the Exodus.

"Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we. Come, let us deal with them wisely, lest they multiply, and it come to pa.s.s, that, when there falleth out any war, they also join themselves unto our enemies, and fight against us: and get them out of the land."

Such are the words which the new king who knew not Joseph, when he came to the throne, spoke to his people with regard to the alien population which had been allowed during a former reign to settle in the land of Goshen, a fruitful district on the north-east of Egypt, east of Bubastis (Zakazik).

It is the speech of one who feared that, if nothing were done to prevent them from becoming too powerful, they would be a source of danger to the state, as they might join, with every chance of success, in any attack which might be made on the kingdom over which he ruled. It was, in all probability, the presence of a similar foreign (Semitic) population in or near this district, about 2100 years B.C., which had contributed-or perhaps even made-the success of the Hyksos invaders, through which Egypt had been ruled by an alien dynasty for five hundred years. The repet.i.tion of such a catastrophe was at all hazards to be prevented. It would seem, therefore, that the persecution of the Hebrews was not undertaken altogether wantonly, but with the object of turning aside a possible misfortune.

As the historical nature of the Exodus has not as yet been absolutely disproved, it is here taken to be a matter of history, and this being the case, it is necessary to try to identify, or, rather, to state what are the most probable opinions, as to the rulers of Egypt at the time of the Oppression and the Exodus. Ramses II. of the nineteenth dynasty is generally held to be the Pharaoh of the Oppression, and Meneptah, his son and successor, the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Lieblein, however, would regard this latter event as having occurred during the reign either of Amenophis III., or his son, Amenophis IV., of the eighteenth dynasty. This latter theory is based on the Tel-el-Amarna letters, which speak of the ?abiri, roving bodies of men which went about Palestine stirring up the people, and even compelling them by force to renounce Egyptian rule (which extended in those days over the whole of this district). It will be part of the scope of the present work to examine into this question.

After the death of Seqnen-Re in battle (see p. 255), he was buried in the usual way at Thebes, implying, as Petrie points out, that the Egyptians had pushed their frontier some way to the north, "so that ceremonials at Thebes were uninterrupted." Further advance, he thinks, was made in the reign of Kames, "the valiant prince," as he calls himself, because Aah-mes was able to besiege the stronghold of the Hyksos down in the Delta at the beginning of his reign, about 1585 B.C. It is to be noted that two names come, to all appearance, between those of Kames and Aah-mes, but these are probably not those of important kings, though a part of the honour of the progress made ought to be accredited to them. To all appearance it was the efforts of the Thebans, who had been pushing their way northwards during these last three years, which prepared the way for the successes of Aah-mes-successes which placed him on the throne of Egypt, thus making him the founder of the eighteenth dynasty.

Before he became Pharaoh, he succeeded, within four or five years, not only in getting rid of the overlordship of the Hyksos kings, but also in driving them out of the Nile valley, taking possession of Avaris, and pursuing them into Palestine. Here, in the fifth year, he was able to capture Sharhana or Sharuhen, some miles south of Lachish. He then went on to Zahi (Phnicia), and later defeated the Mentiu of Setet (the Bedouin of the hill-country), attacking afterwards the Anu Khenti. On his return to Egypt, he found that he had to deal with two outbreaks on the part of those of the Hyksos (probably half-breeds) who remained, and these having been reduced to subjection, there was apparently no further trouble from the Asiatics remaining in the country. So popular was this founder of a new dynasty in Egypt, that both he and his queen had divine honours paid to them beyond those rendered to any other Egyptian ruler. His son Amen-hotep I. shared largely in these testimonies of popular esteem.

After this the power of Egypt increased. The venerable captain of marines, Aah-mes, relates that 'Aa-kheper-ka-Re (Thothmes I.) went against the Rutennu (Syrians) for the purpose of taking satisfaction, and marched as far as Naharaina (Upper Mesopotamia), where he found that an enemy had plotted conspiracy. On this occasion Thothmes gained many victories and took many captives. Another official mentioning the Syrian campaigns of this ruler is Pen-nekheb, who accompanied him to Naharaina. Thothmes III.

also refers to his grandfather's conquest in Syria, stating that he placed another inscription where the tablet of his father 'Aa-kheper-ka-Re was, and adds that "his majesty came to the city of Niy on his return. Then his majesty set up his tablet in Naharaina to enlarge the frontiers of Kemi,"

_i.e._ Egypt. Niy was in the region of Aleppo, on the Euphrates.

Thothmes II. (1516-1503, Petrie) retained those portions of Syria which his father had conquered. An expedition thither is also mentioned by Pen-nekheb, who says: "I followed the king 'A-kheper-en-Re (Thothmes II.), the blessed one. I brought away from the land of the Shasu (Bedouin, apparently the same tribes as those to which the Hyksos or _hak shasu_ belonged) very many prisoners-I cannot reckon them.... The king 'A-kheper-en-Re gave me two gold bracelets, six collars, three bracelets of lapis-lazuli, and a silver war-ax."

Thothmes III. (1505-1449), son of Thothmes II., had one of the longest and most glorious reigns in all Egyptian history. He was born at Thebes, and crowned when about nine years old. On the death of Hatshepsut, the queen regent, his father's first wife, who, however, was not his own mother, his warlike expeditions began, and he a.s.sembled an army on the frontier of Zalu, preparatory to an expedition against the chiefs of Southern Syria, who had rebelled. This was his twenty-second year. Next year, on his coronation-day, he found himself, after a long march, at Gaza, on the way to Carmel and Megiddo, where he defeated the a.s.sembled Syrian chiefs, and utterly routed them on the plain of Esdraelon. The allies then took refuge in the town, which was besieged, and they were obliged to capitulate.

Enormous spoils from this place, as well as from the other cities of Syria, was the result. This expedition was repeated in the two following years.

In his twenty-ninth year he made his fifth expedition to the Syrian hill-country, Tunep, Arvad, and Phnicia, from which latter district much spoil was obtained. The two following years found him in the same region.

In his thirty-third year he set up a tablet on the boundaries of Naharaina. The next year he made a campaign to, and received tribute from Syria, Phnicia, and Cyprus. In his thirty-fifth year he went to Phnicia, and received tribute from Naharaina. The year following this he received tribute from Cyprus. After this he again went to Phnicia, and he is supposed to have received tribute from Cyprus, Syria, and the Hitt.i.tes in the fortieth and forty-first years of his reign. In his forty-second year there was an expedition to Tunep, Kadesh, etc. Besides the above, he either made himself, or dispatched, under his generals, during his long reign (fifty-four years) many expeditions into other lands than those mentioned above, and also took part in numerous works and public functions in his own country.

The expeditions in Syria made by this king are told very graphically and at great length. The march to Megiddo, the council of war, and the dispositions for the attack, are given in full, and the king claims to have himself protected his army when going through a narrow defile in which all might have been lost had the enemy against whom they were marching made an onslaught. Representations of the spoil taken accompany the lists enumerating the amount, and show that the ancient Syrians had attained to a skill, in the arts as then known, equal, if not superior, to that of the Egyptians. Among the places mentioned are Arvad, Kadesh, Gaza, Yemma, etc. Besides Thothmes III.'s own annals, there is an inscription of one of his officers, Amen-em-heb, who gives his version, which, however, is not divided into different years. This text mentions the Negeb, where he took some captives; Carchemish, from which place he obtained spoil, and other places. He speaks also of Thothmes III. having hunted elephants in the land of Niy, one hundred and twenty in number, for their tusks. This agrees with what has been stated from the a.s.syrian inscriptions (pp. 200, 201) concerning the existence of these animals in the Lebanon and around Haran.

Thothmes III. was succeeded by Amenophis II., a warlike and vigorous ruler, who followed in his father's footsteps, and by so doing maintained the power and influence of his country. Petrie (_History_, ii. p. 154) argues with great probability that he was not of age when he came to the throne, and that he was apparently not the eldest of his father's sons.

His first expedition, which was a raid in Asia "to establish his renown,"

was probably, as Prof. Petrie says, in the first or second year of his reign. "His majesty had success (in Shemesh-atuma of South Galilee), his majesty himself made captives there.... Account of what his majesty himself took in this day: living prisoners Satiu 18, oxen 19." Later on he had some further success, and took spoil from the Satiu with whom he fought.

In his second year, six months after the above expedition, he seems to have made a promenade in force as far as the frontiers of the Egyptian domains in Asia, in order to a.s.sert his power, and as a check to any disaffection which might exist. After this there was a triumphal return to Egypt, where he held a festival on the occasion of the laying of the foundation-stone of the temple of Amadeh. Among the captives sent to Egypt were seven chiefs of the territory of Takhsi, near Aleppo, who were hung up by the feet on the fore-part of the king's barque. Of these six were afterwards hung up on the wall of Thebes in the same manner, a circ.u.mstance which suggests that the Egyptians were upon about the same level as the a.s.syrians with regard to their barbarous customs in war, notwithstanding their civilization and polish in other things.

He claims as his own nearly all the lands which his father had conquered-the South land, the Oases, the Lybians, Nubians, Semites, Kefto (according to W. Max Muller, Cilicia), and the Upper Rutennu, or district of Megiddo.

Amenophis II. died in 1423 B.C., and was succeeded by his son, Thothmes IV. His earlier years seem to have been occupied in a.s.serting his power in Syria, and his later years were devoted to Nubia. Naharaina and the Kheta or Hitt.i.tes occur in inscriptions referring to the former period.

According to Manetho, he reigned nine years and eight months. He was succeeded by his son, Amenophis III. (1414-1379, according to Petrie).

At this time Syria was completely in the hands of the Egyptians. Constant intercourse went on between the princes of the two countries, who in Syria seem to have been contented with their subordinate position. It is during this reign that the now celebrated Tel-el-Amarna tablets come to our aid, and show how this was brought about. Alliance between the two countries by marriage had taken place, and the royal and various princely families were therefore related. Besides this, there was naturally reluctance on the part of a prince of Syria to take up a hostile att.i.tude with regard to the king who had taken his daughter in marriage, as he would always be in fear of endangering his daughter's safety, and for the same cause he would naturally try to restrain the petty rulers of his own district, including those of his neighbours who were more of the nature of equals. In addition to this, the sons of the Syrian chiefs were sent to be educated in Egypt, and as the Egyptian ruler at the time had married Syrian princesses, it is probable, as Petrie says, that the sons of Syrian chiefs, educated in Egypt, were married to Egyptians at the close of their education. As it was only stipulated that they should be restored to their native country to succeed their fathers, they may, it is thought, have lived in Egypt until middle life. This being so, the rulers of Syria would naturally become imbued with the thoughts and ways of the Egyptians, and undesirous, therefore, of throwing off the yoke. If, however, things were all really as thus depicted, there is one thing which is strange, namely, that the correspondence which was carried on between the two districts was not in Egyptian (which the princes of Syria ought to have known sufficiently well to write), but in a.s.syro-Babylonian, which was a foreign tongue to them all, especially the king of Mitanni, whose native language was not even Semitic. That the kings of Babylonia should correspond with the king of Egypt in Babylonian was to be expected, but if the kings of Syria, or their sons, were educated in Egypt, it is remarkable that we find so many letters in the Babylonian language.

Apparently, therefore, everything pointed to a continuance of the state of things which existed at the time of the king's accession to the throne. It was evidently his desire that nothing should occur to change the cordial relations which existed between himself and the Egyptian dependencies, hence the mild suzerainty exercised. There was an Ethiopian campaign in his fifth year, after which, to all appearance, no warlike expeditions were undertaken-in fact, it was considered that there was no need for them.

The first wife of Amenophis III. was Teie, as the Tel-el-Amarna tablets call her, the Teyi of the Egyptian monuments. She was daughter of Yewea and Tewa, and was to all appearance of Asiatic nationality. Prof. Petrie thinks that she may have been of Syrian race, and as a matter of fact, her portrait shows her with a pleasant face of Semitic type and a pointed chin. To all appearance, she was a personage of great importance in the land, and when negotiations with the princes of the north were being carried on, she was one of those who were taken into consideration by the outlanders.

[Plate VII.]

Colossal statue of Hadad, dedicated by Bar-Rekub, King of Sam'allu, to Hadad. El, Rekub-el, Shamash, and the G.o.ds of Yadi, in memory of his father, Panammu, about 730 B.C. The horned cap which the G.o.d wears probably shows a.s.syro-Babylonian influence. Gerchin N.E. of Zenjirli. From _Mittheilungen aus den Orientalischen Sammlungen_, Part XI., by permission of the publishing-house of Georg Reimer, Berlin.

In one of the tablets from Tel-el-Amarna, it would appear that, besides Teie, Amenophis III. had married a sister of Duratta, king of Mitanni, named Gilu-?epa, for news of whom Duratta wrote to the Pharaoh, sending presents to him, as well as to his sister. Later on, the Egyptian king asks Duratta for one of his daughters, sending a messenger named Mane with a tablet to that effect. As Duratta in his letter to the Pharaoh Nimmuaria (Neb-mut-Ra,(54) Amenophis III.) refers to her as the (future) mistress of Egypt, it is clear that she was intended as the consort of his son, Amenophis IV. From other letters which pa.s.sed between them, it would seem that the princess in question was named Tadu-?epa, called, in Egyptian, Nefer-t.i.ti (perhaps a translation of her Mitannian name). It was to all appearance the custom in those days, as at the present time, for the kings of the various states to ally themselves by marriage with other royal houses; and at a time when kings, at least, were allowed more wives than one, it was possible for them to take pledges for the preservation of peace by making use of the privilege. Quite in accordance with this are the statements contained in other texts concerning intermarriages of this kind, both Amenophis III. and IV. having likewise espoused Babylonian princesses, daughters of Kallima-Sin and Burra-buria, the son of the latter being at the same time betrothed to Amenophis IV.'s daughter. They were also constantly making presents to each other, each trying to get as much as he possibly could of the things which were not common in his own land-gold, much gold, being the commodity that the king of Egypt was expected to supply. The other kings sent him, in return, various stones (lapis-lazuli being often mentioned), chariots, horses, and other things, both natural and manufactured products. The women by whose means these friendly relations had been established, made use of the messengers sent to their fatherland to transmit messages to their relatives and ask after their health.

From these tablets we obtain certain details as to the state of the Holy Land and the surrounding country before the entry of the Israelites.

Besides the kingdom of Mitanni mentioned above, there were the states of Alaia (supposed to be Cyprus), Ziri-baani (plain of Bashan), Hazor, Askelon, Lachish, Gaza, Qatna (west of Damascus), Accho, Simyra, Tyre, Sidon, the Amorites, the Hitt.i.tes, Dunip (Tenneb), Jerusalem, etc., etc.

Many of them were small states with the cities after which they are named as capital, and naturally were obliged to enter into a league for their common protection, or else accept the suzerainty of some more powerful state, falling, if its protector went under, into the power of the common invader. It must have been in consequence of this state of things in the east Mediterranean littoral that Egypt was able to extend her power so far, and subdue this large district.

From these tablets we learn something of their religion. To all appearance one of the G.o.ds most worshipped in the extreme west of Asia was Rimmon, the Rammanu ("thunderer") of the a.s.syrians and Babylonians, the Addu or Hadad of the Semitic nations of this district (the name Addu afterwards became general as the appellation of the G.o.d in Babylonia and a.s.syria), and the Teupa or Teub of Mitanni (Aram-Naharaim) and district to the north (Armenia). At Tyre they seem to have worshipped a personage or deity called almayatu, whilst the Phnician Astarte is commemorated in al Atarti, "the city of Atartu," perhaps Ashtaroth, 29 miles east of Tiberias (Petrie). As the word Ashtoreth is evidently a lengthening of the name of the a.s.syro-Babylonian G.o.ddess Itar, it is not to be wondered at that this G.o.ddess should be mentioned by the king of Mitanni, Duratta, who refers to a statue of Itar of Nineveh, which had been sent to Egypt, and requests that it may be returned to him soon. The name of Nergal, also, was evidently familiar to the king of Alaia, for he speaks of the hand of that G.o.d as having killed all his people, when wishing to refer to the prevalence of a pestilence there, Nergal being the a.s.syro-Babylonian G.o.d of disease and death. In the same way Duratta speaks of ama, the a.s.syro-Babylonian Sun-G.o.d, but he refers to him more as the luminary which men love than as a G.o.d, though there is every probability that he was worshipped in Mitanni.(55) Another a.s.syro-Babylonian deity whose name occurs is Ninip, once in the name of Abdi-Ninip, "servant of Ninip,"

apparently a Gebalite, and again in _al Beth-Ninip_, "(city of) the temple of Ninip," in a district which Abdi-Airta called upon to unite against Gebal-perhaps the Beth-Ninip in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. In the name of Abdi-Airta it is to be noted that we have here, to all appearance, the name of the _asherah_ or "grove" of the Authorised Version, the "token" of the G.o.ddess Itar,(56) with the ideogram for which the word once interchanges. The Egyptian G.o.d Amana (Amon) is mentioned several times, invoked apparently as a G.o.d in whom the writer believed, though he was the special G.o.d of the Egyptians and the Egyptian king. In addition to the above deities, the names of men reveal Ura, the G.o.d of Dailem near Babylon, Bidina, another Babylonian deity, and Merodach, the princ.i.p.al G.o.d of the Babylonians. Among west Semitic deities may be mentioned Dagan (Dagon), Milku (Melech, Moloch), and others.

Notwithstanding a considerable period of Egyptian rule, therefore, Babylonian influence, which had been predominant in the tract for many centuries, still held the upper hand. Merodach was to all appearance venerated, Nergal was worshipped as the G.o.d of death and disease, Itar was held in high esteem. It must have been during those centuries of Babylonian rule that the worship of Tammuz or Adonis got into the country, becoming one of the stumbling-blocks of the Israelites in later days, when Hebrew women lamented for him, hidden in the realm of darkness where dwelt Persephone (Ere-ki-gala, "the lady of the great domain" of the Babylonians), into whose realm, at great risk, Itar, his spouse, descended to seek him, but only escaped from the rival's clutches by the intervention of the G.o.ds.

Exceedingly interesting are the various forms of government in Western Asia at this period. Among hereditary chiefs may be mentioned Etakama of Gidi (Kadesh), um-addu, who is probably the same as amu-Addu, prince of am?una, Mut-zu'u (see p. 286), and Azru, though this last is doubtful, as in one of the letters he calls himself a governor installed by the king of Egypt. The best example of an elected chief, however, is in all probability Yabitiri, governor of Gaza and Jaffa, who, when young, went down to Egypt and served in the Egyptian army, being afterwards appointed to the posts which he held later. The power of the Egyptian kings of a period somewhat preceding this is well exemplified by the fact, that Addu-nirari of a.s.syria attributes to an Egyptian ruler the appointment of his grandfather and father as kings of Nu?ae, on account of which all three rulers seem to have acknowledged Egyptian overlordship. An interesting instance of female rule is that of Nin-Urmuru (?),(57) who, in her letters, mentions Ajalon and Sar?a (identified with Zorah), probably lying in her district.

Most interesting of all, however, is the case of Jerusalem, whose ruler, as will be seen from the letters quoted later on, was apparently elected by some of the magnates of the district which acknowledged his sway, and who were probably the members of a religious community. Nothing, however, is known of the electorate or the system of election employed-all that can be said is, that the ruler was not placed there by virtue of his father or his mother, but by the "mighty king."

The matter of the government of Dunip, one of the most important towns of ancient Palestine, is also of importance, as it does not seem to have possessed an autocratic head of any kind, and may have been a kind of republic. Its government was probably similar to that of Irqata, which was ruled over by its elders, acknowledging the overlordship of the Egyptian king. A similar state of things seems to have prevailed in Babylonia, where, however, the king of Babylon was naturally recognized as lord of the country. In all probability the towns governed by their elders were regarded as royal cities of Egypt, whilst the others were semi-independent states.

The relations of the Egyptian king with foreign states is well ill.u.s.trated by the following-

Letter From The Babylonian King Burra-Buria (Burna-Buria) To Amenophis IV. King Of Egypt.

"(To) Nap?u'ruria the king of Egypt, my brother, say also thus: 'It is Burra-buria, king of the land of Karu-dunia, thy brother. My health is good. To thee, thy country, thine house, thy wives, thy sons, thy great men, thine horses, thy chariots, may there be very good health.

"I and my brother have spoken friendship with each other, and we said as follows: 'As our fathers were with each other, let us be friendly.' Now my merchants, who went with A?i-?abu, remained in the land of Kina??i (Canaan) for trade. After A?i-?abu proceeded to my brother,(58) in the city ?innatunu of the land of Kina??i (Canaan), when um-adda, son of Malumme, (and) utadna, son of aratum, of the city of Akka (Accho), sent their people, they killed my merchants, and took their money away. When I have sent (Azzu (?)) to thy presence, ask him, and let him tell thee."

(Reverse)

"(Ki)na??i is thy land, and (its) king(s are thy servants). In thy land have I been ill-treated-res(train them): make (up) the money which they have taken away; and kill the people who have killed my subjects, and avenge them. And if thou kill not these people, they will return, and both kill my caravans and thy messengers, and the messenger will be broken off between us, and if (this happen), they will fall away from thee. One man (of) mine, when um-adda had cut off his feet,(59) he held him prisoner; and another man, when utadna, the Akkaite (Acchoite), had caused him to be placed with the servants, became a servant before him.(60) Let (them take) those men to thee, and see thou to (it). And mayest thou know how I fare. I have caused to be brought to thee 1 mana of lapis-stone (as a gi)ft. (Let) my (messe)nger (come back) quickly. Let me know how my brother fares. Do not de(tain) my (mess)enger-let him come (back) quickly."

It is clear from this, and from other inscriptions of the series, that a kind of international law existed among the nations of the ancient East, by which they were expected to protect the caravans pa.s.sing through each other's territory, and, in fact, see that no harm came to any of each other's subjects. They were expected to punish all persons who may have attacked and ill-treated or murdered them, and make rest.i.tution of property stolen. The law (probably an unwritten one) was evidently much the same as prevails among civilized nations at the present day. That these ancient rulers always obtained from their "brothers" the redress which they demanded, is more than doubtful. Burra-buria's entreaty that his messenger might be returned to him quickly points to vexatious delays on former occasions, and probable failure to obtain any justice or redress whatever.

The relations of Egypt with a.s.syria were similar to those with Babylonia, except that the a.s.syrian king, as has been shown, was, in some respects, a va.s.sal.

Letter From The a.s.syrian King Aur-Uballi? To Amenophis IV. King Of Egypt.

(Divided into paragraphs in accordance with the indications of the original text.)

"To Nap?uri, (the great king?), the king of Egypt, my brother, (say) thus: 'It is Aur-uballi?, king of Aur, the great king, thy brother.'

"To thee, to thy house and thy country, may there be peace.

"When I saw thy messengers, I rejoiced greatly. Thy messengers are staying with me for a time.

"I have caused to be brought to thee as thy gift a fine royal chariot of my y(ok)e, and 2 white horses of m(y y)oke, and one chariot without yoke, and 1 seal of fine lapis-lazuli.

"The great king's return-gift may be thus: Gold in thy land is (as) dust-they gather it up. Why should it go round into thine eyes? I have undertaken to build a new palace. Cause gold, as much as its over-laying and its need (requires), to be sent.