Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence [Hardcover]

Ernest S. Frerichs (Editor), Leonard H. Lesko (Editor), William G. Dever (Editor), Brown University (Corporate Author)

Product Details

• Hardcover: 112 pages
• Publisher: Eisenbrauns (June 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1575060256
• ISBN-13: 978-1575060255
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,405,719 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Balanced Account of Exodus Evidence, February 7, 2003

By A Customer

This review is from: Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence (Hardcover)

This is an excellent book. A number of scholars discuss the evidence (archaeological and historical) for the exodus. There is little or nothing in the direct records for this event, but that is not surprising. The ancient Egyptians did not record their defeats, and the exodus would have represented a setback.

The evidence is indirect, for example, mention in the Bible of the names of two towns (Ramses and Pithom) that actually existed, or the inscription on the "Israel stela" which mentions the Israelites without adding the symbol for a settlement, which is added to the names of the peoples conquered by Pharaoh Merneptah (successor to Ramses II), suggesting that the Israelites at that time were a (wandering) people, not a place.

However, it is impossible that the Israelites numbered 600,000 men (not counting families), which is the Biblical figure. The total population of Egypt at that time was unlikely to have exceeded 2-3 million. Probably the tale of the exodus lost nothing in the (re)telling, and if it did occur, in the sense of the Israelites being freed to leave Egypt, it involved a very, very much smaller number of persons. This would square with its not being remarked upon in Egyptian records or in the documents of other kingdoms in the region.

6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Pros and Cons for an Exodus, November 29, 2002

By 

Walter Mattfeld (Millbury, MA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence (Hardcover)

The book consists of a number of papers read by professional scholars at a symposium to discuss what evidence exists for an Exodus from an Egyptian perspective. Some scholars are Bible Scholars, others are Egyptologists. All are well versed in the various arguments for and against the Exodus. Some thought the Exodus did occur, others not, each presented their arguments in support of their views. It was helpful to see how each interpreted the Egyptian data, e.g., ancient annals or records and archaeological data in support of, or in denial of, an Exodus. The reader is left to decide for himself, the merits of the Pros and Cons brought out in the papers. Those desiring to pursue in greater depth the "pros" and "cons" for the Exodus are invited to visit my website,...and navigating to the OT menu, peruse my articles on the Exodus utilizing archaeological evidence assembled by scholars like Israel Finkelstein and Burton MacDonald, who are published on the subject.

12 of 17 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A Multi-scholar review with controlling biases, June 17, 2000

By 

T. Nelson (Warren, Michigan United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Exodus: The Egyptian Evidence (Hardcover)

This collection of 5 papers was compiled from a conference considering if Egyptian evidence for the biblical exodus exists. Immediately in the intro it is stated "the traditional approach has given large weight to the assertions of the biblical narrative even when it provided acknowledged ambiguities and even seeming contradictions". Unfortunately no examples are given. While there is no doubt truth in the statement that "those who continue to affirm the historicity of the Exodus will lean heavily on a presumed positive relation between the artifact/graphic Egyptian evidence and the bible text," it likewise true that a predisposed attitude that the exodus story can never be anything more than folktale or myth, despite any evidence which may lend to the contrary, will also never allow arrival at what is reality. An example is found in statements such as "the Egyptian material may serve as analogy to the biblical account and in part even as indirect proof" or "we do possess several significant indirect sources, a sort of circumstantial evidence that lends greater authority to the biblical account" and such evidence is amply reviewed, yet the papers usually conclude with such statements as "there is not a word in a text or an archaeological artifact that lends credence to the biblical narrative. From the Egyptian view, the O.T. narrative records a series of earth shaking episodes that never happened." Such conclusions stand in stark contradiction to other statements made in the papers such as why a biblical editor would mention the city of Ramesses when it no longer existed and had not for centuries if the exodus was entirely a folktale fabricated in a post-exilic period. Thus as I read it, all the reviews, although some more than others, reflected a bias against the bible account being supported in any way by the Egyptian evidence as even possibly being a historic event in their conclusions despite statements in their context to the contrary.