1 jan 1963 ano antes da era comum - Abraham Meets Amenemhat I

Descrição:

Gertoux, Gérard. The Pharaoh of the Exodus Fairy tale or real history? Outcome of the Investigation.


Gertoux, Gérard. Sarah wife of Abraham Fairy tale or real history? Outcome of the Investigation.


[See Collapse of Ur to the right as well]

Abram's journey in Egypt is extremely well dated in the Bible. Abram was 75 years old and he came to Canaan via Haran, then Hebron1 was founded (Gn 12:4-9; Nb 13:22) but shortly after Abram went into Egypt due to a famine in Canaan (Gn 12:10-15). When Abram entered Egypt, the pharaoh he met wanted to marry Sarai, his wife. Despite his failing to marry Sarai, he gave him a lot of cattle as well as male and female servants (Gn 12:14-20). When Abram returned to Canaan, the Transjordan kings revolt was at its peak (Gn 14:4), presumably because taxes (or looting) became unbearable.

According to the biblical timeline Abraham met an anonymous pharaoh (Amenemhat I) during the short period 1963-1957 BCE. Two major events, which occurred during the reign of this anonymous pharaoh, are verifiable: 1) Tanis was founded during his reign and 2) the scale of military activity carried out by Chedorlaomer in the area south of Palestine (Shutu) and north of Egypt (Sinai) had to have worried that pharaoh.

[See Hebron/Tanis Founded to the right for event #1].

It is obvious that Sinai tribes were not able to threaten seriously the powerful Egyptian Empire, but in contrast the powerful king of Elam could. In fact the ambitious project of Chedorlaomer, powerful king of Elam, had to have worried Amenemhat I because southern Canaan was a big source of supply from the 5th Dynasty (Husson, Valbelle: 1992, 66-67), including labour55 (Menu: 2010, 171-183). For example, Sinuhe as high-ranking administrator of Amenemhat I bore the title: Nobleman and overlord, governor and canal-cutter, sovereign among the Asiatics (ity m styw). Whereas kings of Ur III regarded the kings of Syria as vassals, the Egyptian royal administration regarded the kings of Canaan mainly as providers under the aegis of the crown and was only charging a toll for foreigners (Menu: 2004, 196-202,224). It is noteworthy that the absence of taxes on goods favoured trade. The arrival of Chedorlaomer in northern Egypt and his military interventions caused great concern as can be seen on the stela of Nesu-Montu dated year 24 of Amenemhat I (1953 BCE)... [see Stela of General Nessumontu to the right]

His first step in reorganizing the country after the Delta and its neighbours were subjugated was therefore the transfer of his residence from Thebes to the north. He founded Itj-tawy as the new capital of Egypt, instead of Memphis, probably about year 20 of his reign (1957 BCE) when his son Senwosret was established as co-regent. However, the period of military activity seems to have stopped after the year 24 since the story of Sinuhe describes peaceful relations between Egypt and Syria (Cohen: 2002, 36-41).

The only period of real conflict with the northern Delta is restricted to a brief period from year 20 to year 24 of Amenemhat I. Although this was not a war, but rather a police raid at the borders of Egypt, the intervention of Nesu- Montu was the first serious incident between Egypt and Canaan. It is not a coincidence that the oldest execration texts are dated from this period (20th century BCE). Execration rituals were stylized magical actions aimed at thwarting or eradicating foes and were similar in nature to other protective measures, such as apotropaic animal sacrifice or walking on depictions of enemies.

In summary, the reaction of Amenemhat I, a mighty pharaoh of the 12th dynasty, is not mysterious, but on the contrary entirely understandable. Indeed, Chedorlaomer had established a protectorate over the southern Palestine for 14 years in a wealthy area called Shutu[m] by Egyptians (Sodom in the Bible) and in addition this mighty Mesopotamian king had obviously intended to expand in the Egyptian Delta, which consistuted a serious threat to Egypt.

Amenemhat I had to have known of the existence of the kingdom of Elam (Awan I), through the Mesopotamian merchants who came to Byblos, however the Egyptians never went to Canaan (and of course farther) from the 6th Dynasty to 12th Dynasty (Vandersleyen: 1995, 28-30), because no Egyptian objects like scarabs, between Pepi II (2181-2127) and Senwosret I (1946-1901), have been unearthed in Palestine. Thus, Abraham was a person of distinction for Amenemhat because he came from a far away country (Shinar/ Sumer), which was little known by Egyptians. Furthermore he had information about Chedorlaomer that could be of outstanding importance to Amenemhat I.

Two points indirectly confirm the biblical narrative about Abraham and Chedorlaomer: 1) although the Egyptians never went into Canaan before Amenemhat I, the Execration Texts contain a very well informed report about many Canaanite cities (who was the informant?), 2) in addition, the spelling of these Canaanite cities is not Canaanite but their ending is in Old Babylonian characterized by mimation (ending in -um/-im), a language spoken in Ur which disappeared after the collapse of this famous city (Huehnergard: 2000, 258-259; Vacin: 2009, 59-60). Several points show that Amenemhat I took the Elamite threat very seriously. He feared that, after having annexed the south of Canaan (Sodom area), which was a wealthy area, Chedorlaomer would succeed in annexing the Sinai and then northern Egypt (Delta). One has to know that trade and diplomacy were closely linked at that time. The main income of a king came from taxes levied on traveling merchants who benefited in return of armed protection (provided by a contingent of about 300 to 600 soldiers) on the territory crossed. To avoid being attacked by an enemy, several kings of a region (between 10 to 20) could forge alliances with a great king in order to receive “international” protection in case of aggression. A great king could unite a set of other great kings and thereby form a confederation of vassal kingdoms (which had to pay tribute to their great king). These big confederations functioned as empires. If a vassal king was breaking his alliance with the “emperor” (by stopping to pay tribute), he was attacked by an army provided by the other kings of the confederation... This is apparently what happened with the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah who rebelled and were therefore attacked by an expeditionary force (of around 2000 soldiers because there were 4 kings) led by Chedorlaomer (Gn 14:1-5). Amenemhat I had likely feared that Chedorlaomer would forge alliances with the nomarchs of northern Egypt and consequently that the Delta region would become a vassal kingdom of Elam. To thwart this annexation, he undertook radical and unprecedented measures (in 1957 BCE) which can not be explained otherwise: 1) he moved his capital in the south (Thebes) to the north of Egypt (Itj-tawy) to better control the area; 2) he named his son co-regent (Senwosret) to ensure his succession in case of assassination (which moreover happened); 3) he established checkpoints on the “Ways of Horus”, this line of fortifications was called the “Walls of the Ruler” (Hoffmeier: 2006, 1-20). Given this exceptional context the arrival of Abram in Egypt was perceived by Amenemhat as providential because this eminent character, who was an “international merchant” coming from Shinar, knew well therefore Chedorlaomer and, by luck, also his expansionism in southern Canaan. Accordingly, for Amenemhat I, Abram was the providential “whistle-blower of Chedorlaomer’s conspiracy”.

When Amenemhat understood that the confederation of trans-Jordanian kings had been organized by Kudur-Lagamar and might extend south of Canaan as well as in northern Egypt he organized a defensive alliance to neutralize that “offensive” alliance made of Canaanite kings. As Abram had planned to return to this region, Amenemhat made a covenant with him so that he became an ally on his return to Canaan. For that he gave him a lot of money and gold, but especially a military escort consisting of 318 “trained men” (Gn 14:14), that is a crack regiment, so that he could build alliances with some Canaanite kings.

The Bible states that among the many Egyptian menservants that Abram received (Gn 12:16) there were 318 trained men generated in his household (Gn 14:14). The phrase hanîkaîw yelîdê betô literally means “dedicated men born ones of his house” or “borne of/ brought forth” (Gn 21:9) / “produced” (Job 38:28) “of his house” and corresponds exactly to the Akkadian phrase: wilid bītim “house-born slaves” (Chirichigno: 1993, 90-91). These trained men were given to Abraham and not purchased, they were Egyptian servants not Hebrew children, because Abraham was a rich businessman who was the head of a large farm (Gn 13:5-9), not a slave merchant (Gn 37:27-28). These “dedicated men” were not born in Ur because training an army was the privilege of kings, furthermore, the word “elite men” appears for the first time in the Egyptian execration texts (c. -1950), it was never used in Mesopotamia. In addition, if Abram had entered in Egypt with an army of 318 trained men, he would not have been allowed to pass the check points along the “Way of Shur” to Egypt because he would have been stopped immediately by the military commanders of the “Ways of Horus” who had a control mission of travellers. The term ḥanik “trained man” is unique in the whole Bible, but it appears in the execration texts to designate Egyptian elite warriors (Pritchard: 1969, 328-329). Amenemhat therefore had considered Abram as a potential ally (against Chedorlaomer) who could secure the south of Palestine on his return to Shechem (Gn 12:6). Thus, when he came back to Canaan, Abram was considered as a mighty chief of God (Gn 23:6) or a king of God (LXX) who had authority to associate with other chiefs to form a confederation.

Abram went up out of Egypt to the Negeb with Lot (Gn 13:1) and formed an Amorite confederation with 3 princes Aner, Eshcol and Mamre (Gn 14:24). In 1955 BCE the confederation of Transjordan kings around Sodom and Gomorrah refused to pay tribute and rebelled against Kudur-Lagamar (Gn 14:3- 4). In 1954 BCE, Abram mustered his army of 318 Egyptian elite men as well as his three Amorite confederates (Gn 14:13-14,24) to retaliate against the four Mesopotamian kings by means of an ambush at night, thus Chedorlaomer was “cut out” (Gn 14:15-17, LXX). In 1953 BCE, Nesu-Montu, Army General of Amenemhat I, repatriated to Egypt the army which had been given to Abram as well as a part of the booty (Gn 14:24).

Conclusion: according to absolute chronology, Abraham met Pharaoh Amenemhat I (1975-1946), in his 14th year of reign (1963 BCE), then he founded Tanis in his 20th year (1957 BCE) of reign and led a military action against Kudur-Lagamar in his 23rd year of reign (1954 BCE).

Among the durations of these eight reigns (12th Dynasty), one can see that the Turin King List is quite reliable, as well as the radiocarbon dating, because there is only one mistake (highlighted in orange) out of eight. In contrast half of the durations coming from Manetho are wrong (the values with an asterisk are supposed to be original?).

_____

CREATION AND CATASTROPHE CHRONOLOGY
by Barry Setterfield, September 1999

Egyptian historical dates are precise from the very commencement of the 12th Dynasty under the usurper Amenemhet I in 1991 BC. It is thus this pharaoh who commenced the affliction period. There is evidence of this since Amenemhet I was noted for expelling Semitic settlers and starting up anti-Semitic feelings in Egypt.

_____

C14 Dating (see chart)

_____

Turin King List (see chart)

Adicionado na linha do tempo:

Data: