This seems like such a pointless fabrication, if it is.
So what was the point of fabricating this in the old testament?
For the same reason the English “fabricated” the tales of King Arthur and Robin Hood, the French “fabricated” the story of Roland, and the Greeks “fabricated” the deeds of the gods, the ordeals of Hercules, and the war against Troy and the voyages of Ulysses.
History is a hard thing to keep track of when all you’ve got are oral recollections passed down from generation to generation.
Someone needed heroes and villains.
Yes I get that, I guess my real question is why Egypt? Is there any theory on if there was an actual enslavement and exodus and from where?
Egypt was geographically close to ancient Israel, it was the dominant military power in the region, and there is documentary evidence on the part of the Egyptians that they engaged in campaigns against the inhabitants of Israel.
It’s hardly implausible that enslavement by the Egyptians would become part of the Israelites’ national mythology.
Given that the answer to this must be speculative, this is more appropriate to GD than GQ.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
From Wikipedia:
I guess we’d have to part the unread sea to determine the origins.
In The Bible Unearthed, Silberman & Finkelstein posit that it was fabricated after the destruction of the Kingdom of Israel, and the influx of Israelite refugee-priests to the surviving Kingdom of Judah, in order to provide a national propaganda-myth, because in those days conquest was held to confer better title to territory than indigenous habitation; but there is no extrabiblical evidence at all of the Exodus, and there would be if it happened anything like as described, and there is some archaeological evidence of non-pork-eaters (no pig bones found in their dig-sites, unlike dig-sites elsewhere in Canaan/Palestine) inhabiting the neighborhood of Jerusalem since the Stone Age.
“Fabricated” is a loaded and unhelpful term to use, because it implies that someone sat down and made up the story out of whole cloth. Like the other legends that Smapti lists, the myth of Moses and the Exodus is one that evolved through oral retelling through the centuries before it was written down and codified. It may have originated in a proto-Isrealite Canaanite tribe or maybe at one time there really was a group of slaves who left Egypt and settled in the Jordan. There are enough curious details that seem out of place to make one wonder why they would have been added intentionally. In other words, no one “fabricated” it; it’s a product of centuries of tribal culture.
Claiming an Egyptian connection to ones origin story is pretty popular. Jesus takes a pretty random and unlikely trip there to hide from Herod. Ancient Greek philosophers like Thales and Pythagoras were supposedly taught there. The Gypsies claimed an Egyptian origin. Joseph Smith’s tablets were written in “reformed Egyptian”. The Masons were founded by Eulid in Alexandria. A wide number of European poeple traced their mythic origins through Egypt, even Scotland traced its origins to an Egyptian princess, which is a pretty big stretch even by the standards of myths.
So I suspect the proto-Jews wanted to tie themselves to Egypt the same reason everyone else does, and the same reason the country still fascinates people today. Its huge and well preserved monuments make it obvious even to relatively ancient people that Egyptian culture and learning were incredibly ancient.
I think this is a good explanation, and would apply to many legends. The form of the story that we know from the OT may have been reformed for some political purpose, but it’s always easier to start from something people have heard of before.
Perhaps there was a smallish incident, a few dozen slaves escaping the plantation at night, magnified into greater mythos, not even deliberately.
A number of people seem to believe Karl the Great and other Franks lived in massive Disneyesque castles, all ashlared stone and towering turrets, a la Viollet-le-Duc.
I once attended a Seder while in college. It was amongst a group of friends, only a few of whom were Jewish. One such friend, an Egyptian, was offended at the story that was told, and later told me that the Egyptians were very good record keepers, and yet had no records of enslavement of Jews. (The same person also insists that “semitic” is distinct from “jewish”, so I know that he has less than traditional views).
How well documented is the connection between Egypt and the Israelites?
The Greeks told no tales of Hercules or Ulysses. And Athena had Troy whacked for good reason.
Well, one supposes with Moses the prose is pro-woeses
Disposed to show noses Pinocchio-sly
Some knows-it-all schmoeses exposes, opposes
But those us God choses did all goeses free.
He is correct. “Semitic” is a linguistic term, while “Jewish” is an ethnic/religious/tribal term.
I posted this before in a thread about Moses. A few years ago I thought that there were some traditions coming from very early in the past and I expected that there was some weak evidence that supported the tale, but then I did look on what the scholars reported… Not even weak evidence to note.
As I pointed before, the greatest miracle is in reality in the skill shown by the scholar interviewed by PBS, she manages to throw so many bones to the faithful in the audience that one could build an ossuary church with them. But at the same time she let us know that that it may had been just a few people involved in reality, and that several ancient tribal leaders were used as the basis of the tale rather than a single leader called Moses.
As for why then the tale was “fabricated” (one really misses the point if one sees the bible literally, it should be seen metaphorically) it actually gives a good counterpoint to the “slavery will always exist” seen elsewhere in the bible. One of the most important things that we should remember is that slavery should never be accepted again as a thing that should be considered normal.
Agreed, there was no bad intent I just don’t have good sense picking the right word.
I came to the word fabricate just because it is a situation that did not happen.
I saw a theory that it is a warped oral history version of the Egyptians occupying Canaan.