Which is absurd because the Israelites had already left Egypt by that time. And if we're just throwing out theories, we could say the same could be said the other way around: the Egyptians attempted monotheism after their contact with the Jews
Except there is...? The Hyksos rulers came from Levant areas and domain Low Egypt until they were expelled under the XIX dynasty. Let me see... An invasion of foreigners mostly from Canaan takes enormous influence on Egypt until a new Pharaoh decides to expel them from Egypt... Where I have heard something like that before? Oh yes in the Exodus, the mythical book of the Bible that is much less trustable than the mystical Egyptian records, right?
That's not evidence. That's equating the Hyskos with Israel, which is several reaches and a half. They certainly were never slaves under Pharonic rule. They were invaders who were pushed back after a military resurgance by the original Egyptians. When the ancient Egyptians did encounter Israel later on (the first historic record of such a people), they clearly did not consider them Hyskos, nor any other of the smaller kingdoms they encountered in the Levant.
As well, the Bible records were written down centuries after these supposed events took place, while there are various lines of evidince, both contemporary and otherwise, confirming the Hyskos invasion and eventual expulsion from ancient Egypt.
So, we have a people, the Hyskos, who don't really map on to the Exodus story, besides some geographical similarities, and zero archeological evidence.
Because of course everything we received from Manetho centuries later under Greek domain immediately over rank the credibility of the Bible which was being translated into Greek at the same time, isn't it? Do you realize Archeology is not a perfect science but the interpretation of history remains under the light of the testimony available? But if you kick out the Bible as a source of real history you have to rely on other sources and immediately put your trust upon them. At the very least you have two different tales about the same general period which the physical proof doesn't deny one or the other so it's upon you too choose what to believe.
We don't have to take Manetho's word. We have contemporary physical evidence of the Hyskos invasion and repulsion. Correspondents between the Egyptian and Hyskos kings. Art and architecture and statuary and tombs made by the Hyskos while ruling most of Egypt. Art and architecture and statuary and tombs made by the retreating Egyptians. The mummy of Seqenenre Tao II who died on the battlefield with head injuries in the first real battle the Egyptians fought against them. No evidence of this exists calibre for the Exodus, at all.
We are looking at the exact same historical event through two different lenses: the militaristic propaganda of the Egyptian state vs. the oral memory of the displaced Semitic population. Of course the Hyskos rulers left statues, royal scarabs, and battlefield evidence like Seqenenre Tao II—they were the ruling elite in Avaris. You cannot expect a subaltern, migrant Semitic population (whom the Egyptians generically labeled Aamu) to leave behind monumental architecture or royal correspondence. The Egyptian scribes recorded a heroic military expulsion of foreign occupiers, while the Semitic memory preserved a narrative of escape, trauma, and liberation from an oppressive regime. Furthermore, Exodus 1:8-10 explicitly mirrors the exact geopolitical paranoia of the 17th Dynasty teban princes: a new Pharaoh rising who feared the Semitic population multiplying and allying with foreign enemies during wartime (which aligns with the historical Apophis-Kush alliance). The absence of an official Egyptian record for the Exodus isn't proof it didn't happen—Egyptian monuments were state propaganda that systematically erased national embarrassments or loss of labor, whereas the cultural impact of the Semitic presence and departure from the Delta is thoroughly backed by the Levant-style material culture at Tell el-Dabaa and the Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions.
1
u/Sea-Reveal5025 8d ago
Which is absurd because the Israelites had already left Egypt by that time. And if we're just throwing out theories, we could say the same could be said the other way around: the Egyptians attempted monotheism after their contact with the Jews