Is there archaeological evidence of the biblical patriarch Joseph?
If you misunderstand the biblical Exodus, i.e. if you put the Exodus in a historical context to which it does not belong, then – by definition – you will not find any archaeological evidence. about Joseph, or any other biblical figure for that matter.
And this is exactly what most archaeologists did when they dated the Exodus. First, they say that the Exodus didn't happen. Then, irrationally, they determined that what they said didn't happen did happen in the 13th century BC, which is the correct date – that is, 1270 BC.
But if you choose a date for the Exodus suggested by the Bible itself, which is 480 years before the construction of Solomon's Temple (1 Kings 6:1), you will have a date around 1,500 BC. Based on archeology and textual analysis, the late professors John Bimson and David Livingston have proposed a similar date.
So let's dig into biblical chronology and see if it leads us to any archeology involving an Israelite patriarch named Joseph, famous for his "many long-sleeve" cloak. color" no:
According to the Torah (The Five Books of Moses), the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years (Exodus 12:40). According to the Talmud, the text follows the ancient Rabbinic tradition, it is only 215 years old (Pirkei Rabbi Elieser, c.48). Based on the life cycle of generations of Israelis coming and going from Egypt, 215 years makes even more sense. But another way to look at it is that there were two groups that left Egypt during the Biblical Exodus – one after being in Egypt for 430 years, and the other after staying there for 215 years.
History and archeology argue “for” or “against” the idea that two groups of people left Egypt during the Biblical Exodus? Without a doubt, they argued in favor. Around 1,500 BC, a group of Canaanites that scholars called the "Hyksos" and the ancient Egyptians called the "Amo" left Egypt in a mass exodus. Scholars call this the "Expulsion of Hyksos". At the same time, the Bible tells us (in the original Hebrew) that “Amo Israel,” or the people of Israel, followed Moses to the Promised Land.
In this week's Torah excerpt, "Ki Tisa," we have the story of "Am" who created the golden calf. These people seem to be called "Hyksos". Their side was a direct challenge to the leadership of Moses and to his kinship of Israel (Exodus 30:11-34:35).
The Hyksos counter-revolution was only quelled after about 3,000 rebels were killed by Moses and his Levite family militia (Exodus 32:28). Either way, the biblical story clearly implies that two groups left Egypt, the pro-Moses and the anti-Moses.
This is an important point because the evidence for the Biblical Exodus may be hiding behind the archeology of Hyksos.
When the Torah records that the Israelites originally came to the plains of Egypt because of the famine, it seems that there were some Canaanite people, the Hyksos, there. In Genesis 41:44, Joseph, son of Jacob, becomes like Pharaoh, i.e. second to Pharaoh of Egypt.
If Israeli estimates of their presence in Egypt are correct, Joseph's ascension to power took place around 1,700 BC. If Joseph is indeed a pharaoh-like figure in power, who ruled over both Israel and the Hyksos, it is thought that there must be some kind of archaeological remains attesting to his reign. And there was.
Is it named after the biblical Joseph?
Professor Manfred Bietak has been digging at Tell el-Dab'a in Egypt for over 40 years. He identified it as "Avaris", the ancient Hyksos capital. Avaris is in the middle of what the Bible calls "Goshen," the area where the Israelites lived before the Exodus. The word "Avaris" has no meaning in the Egyptian language.
However, in the Torah, Joseph is repeatedly referred to as "the Hebrew"; ie "Ivri" in Hebrew. He is also called many times and strangely "Ha Ish"; "That man". In other words, the word “Avaris” most likely refers to Joseph, “Ish Ivri,” or “the Hebrew man” (Genesis 39:14). All of this is lost in translation when Joseph is simply referred to as “a Hebrew.”
In other words, the so-called capital Hyksos seems to be named after Joseph, "Ish Ivri" i.e. Avar-Ish.
Egypt is not originally Egyptian.
Between 1986 and 1988, Professor Bietak found the remains of a large statue that appeared to belong to a non-Egyptian king Avaris. Although only fragments remain, archaeologists estimate the original dimensions of the 2-meter-tall sitting human statue and its 1.5-meter pedestal, which is about one and a half times the actual size.
Through the statue's right shoulder, you can still see his "scepter", which is a symbol of his rule. On the back – notably with the biblical Joseph – you can still see evidence that the ruler wore a striped garment, made up of at least three colors: black, red, and white.
He was found in a grave. Empty tomb. This may have been the result of looting, but one cannot help but recall that the biblical story clearly tells us that when the Israelites left Egypt for the Exodus, they took their bones with them. of Joseph (Exodus 13:19).
In other words, to match the biblical account, any tomb of Joseph in Egypt would have to be empty.
They call the statue "Asiatic" meaning he is not an Egyptian, rather he is someone from the Canaan/Israel region. They may also call him “Ish Ivri”. Not much is left of his face because after his reign, like with the biblical Joseph, his people seem to have gone through a decline. In other words, someone in ancient times hit the statue's face with a hammer.
But his hairstyle is still intact. They call it the “mushroom” hairstyle and it is particularly relevant to people who are not of Egyptian origin, but from the ancient Canaan/Israel region. Interestingly, it is quite “trendy,” and the Talmud tries to tell us that Joseph was a fashionista (Genesis Rabbah, 87:3). In fact, Rabbinic Midrash Tanhuma Vayyesheb 8 specifically talks about Joseph curling his hair.
The statue was found in a geological formation corresponding to 1,700 BC. In other words, if we take the year 1,500 BC as the date of the Exodus, and if the Israelites stayed in Egypt for about 200 years, then the statue of this ruler fits perfectly with the story of the ancestors. Joseph's father, who reigned for about 215 years before the Exodus.
It's conjecture, of course, but based on the evidence, I think we can say that a statue of Joseph was most likely found in Egypt. Why is no one paying attention? Because historians – consciously or unconsciously – hide the history of Israel/Jewish behind terms like “Hyksos”, “Asiatics” and “Amo”.
Interestingly, the Egyptian authorities seem to believe that the statue is indeed related to the Judaic Bible. A few years ago, when I was in Egypt filming “The Exodus: Decoded”, I asked to film Professor Bietak's discovery.
The Egyptian authorities were not interested in any archeology that confirmed the Jewish Bible, so they told me the statue was “misplaced”. But because the artifact is quite heavy, this is not something that you can easily "misplace".
It seems that the Egyptians also believed that what they were hiding in the heart of the Cairo Museum was the only monument to the patriarch Joseph ever found.
About the Authors: Simcha Jacobovici is an Israeli-Canadian filmmaker and journalist. He is a three-time Emmy Award winner for "Outstanding Investigative Journalism" and a New York Times best-selling author. He is also a teaching assistant in the Department of Religion at Huntington University, Ontario.